[filmscanners] Re: Sprintscan 4000 does not initialize anymore
I have browsed your article about polaroid 4000 does not initialize anymore. My scanner has the same problem. The problem is the noisy sound when i turn scanner on. Obviously, it comes from rail. But the rail gear wheel keep running to reject film holder even no film carrier inside. And the computer can not recognise scanner. Is that possible problem about dust or dirty inside? Which part if so? Or any recommendation to fix it up? The noisy sound when you turn the scanner on is normal. It goes through a self-test while the yellow light is blinking. What is not normal is when that blinking light stays blinking and doesn't become a steady light. You did see Tonys instructions on how to take your scanner apart and clean it, didn't you? It is very thorough. I have to admit, that I haven't gotten my nerve up to actually *do* it, despite the fact that the scanner sits there useless right now. One of these years I'll gather the nerve. Regards, Barbara -- Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro! https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: polaroid dust and scratch program
From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Bob Geoghegan [bob...@dgiinc.com] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2010 3:02 PM To: Paul Patton Subject: [filmscanners] RE: polaroid dust and scratch program Hi Paul, Here's a link to the archived download page: http://web.archive.org/web/20080821225815/http://www.polaroid.com/service/so ftware/poladsr/poladsr.html If that doesn't work, go to www.archive.org and search for the original location: http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/poladsr.html I installed from the top link in February and had no problems, even under Win7 64 bit. Bob G Got it. Thanks. -Paul Patton Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Film holders for Polaroid SprintScan 4000
As I am sure you know Polaroid has gone through several owners in the last few years. I don't see an Australian contact. The closest seems to be Japan and China. I have emailed their customer support in the US to ask about access to these parts, and will see what they have to say, if anything. I also checked Microtek, who made the scanners for Polaroid, but they seem to have very little customer support for legacy products. I'll report back once I get anything. Art Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote: Can anyone here suggest where I could buy film holders to suit a SprintScan 4000? I have been offered a scanner that has lost its film holders. Peter Marquis-Kyle Brisbane, Australia Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Film holders for Polaroid SprintScan 4000
Thanks for all the answers to my question, but I have decided not to buy this particular scanner. The seller wants more money for it than I am willing to pay. It was good to see the list wake up and spring into action -- my thanks to the participants, and to Tony Sleep for keeping the list going. Peter Marquis-Kyle Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Tips For Sharp Scans Using Nikon 5000 ED
On 28/09/2009 Karen and John Hinkey wrote: I managed to get my old SS4000 to work for a while and compared scans of the same slide between the SS4000 and 5000 ED and found that when using Vuescan the results were very similar regarding sharpness, although the raw image came out noticeably better with Vuescan. I found that using NikonScan did not produce quite as sharp of scan for whatever reason. Anyone have hints as to why the NikonScan image was not quite as sharp? Did I have some basic parameter wrong? The usual issue with Nikon scanners is focus. Their LED lightsource is not as bright as other mfr's conventional lamps, which compels a faster lens with shallower depth of focus. This makes Nikons sensitive to film flatness. It's been years since I used Nikonscan but my recollection is that the focus area was configureable - you could focus manually on any part of the frame or set the scanner to autofocus on it. VS may just be making a better automatic choice. But I am guessing. However I'd look at perhaps changing the area that NS is set to use if it is indeed still possible. I don't know whether VS supports the hopper, but do some research before committing to it. All NS hoppers have a mixed reputation, for jamming and misfeeding, and if I remember right, there is the additional limitation that exposure used for the first slide is used for the entire batch. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Polaroid Sprintscan 4000 DIY repairs
On 19/09/2009 Tony Sleep wrote: http://tonysleep.co.uk/polaroid-sprintscan-4000-diy-repairs Now with a few small additions and edits for clarity. NB this is not currently indexed from my site menus as, like a bunch of similarly hidden motorcycle features it is really off-topic for the site, so the direct URL is the only way of finding it. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Sprintscan 4000 does not initialize anymore
Regarding vuescan, if you bought it in the era when there was only one version of the program, you DO have what is now the pro version and will get free updates. Ed, unlike me, keeps great paperwork. He should have you purchase record. Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
That works! I didn't even notice the 4 screws securing the top of the carriage as they were black--not the same silver color as the other screws. The top half of my mirror was dusty. The lens looks fine. I think my scans are better now. Thanks. Tony Sleep tonysl...@halftone.co.uk wrote: On 20/07/2009 Tony Sleep wrote: There is a 3rd screw down a hole (top rhs of the cover, as shown), and the 4th retains the cover over the stepper mechanism - the slim rectangular box protuberance that your LH sketched blue line crosses. Essentially, there is a screw in each of the 4 corners of the transport cover. On second thoughts this may be wrong, my memory seems to have holes in it... the 4th screw may not be in the stepper cover but also down a hole, bottom RH corner of the transport cover. Anyhow, one way or another there are 4 screws that retain that cover. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
On 20/07/2009 Tony Sleep wrote: There is a 3rd screw down a hole (top rhs of the cover, as shown), and the 4th retains the cover over the stepper mechanism - the slim rectangular box protuberance that your LH sketched blue line crosses. Essentially, there is a screw in each of the 4 corners of the transport cover. On second thoughts this may be wrong, my memory seems to have holes in it... the 4th screw may not be in the stepper cover but also down a hole, bottom RH corner of the transport cover. Anyhow, one way or another there are 4 screws that retain that cover. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
James wrote this last month. At the moment, I have my SS4000 apart and I have removed 10 (not 6) self-tappers but see no way to remove the carriage. I do have the lamp off, however. Any suggestions? Is there a site with some images of this process? I spent some time with google but was not successful. I am amazed how much dust is inside the machine right now! On 13/06/2009 James L. Sims wrote: With the support for my Polaroid Sprintscan 120 now unavailable, I am looking for a replacement. Vuescan should resolve antique s/w issues on Windows, though SCSI support may become more awkward I believe ASPI drivers are available for Vista. On Mac I don't know with current OSX, but similar was possible. Same applies to SCSI Nikons etc. Regarding physical service, I recently popped the lid off my Polaroid 4000 (4 lever tabs) as it seemed to have got rather flary and low contrast with some strongly backlit slides that included bright backgrounds, despite living under a dust cover when not in use. Half a dozen self-tappers later and I was able to remove the lamp holder and the top of the film carrier carriage. I was then able to clean the angled mirror with a DSLR sensor swab - it was covered in a thick layer of dust. Inspection with a torch showed the lens to be clean, reflected in the mirror. I then cleaned every trace of dust and dirt from the mechanism surfaces I could get at, and wiped and re-lubricated the helical carriage advance screws. Result : a total transformation! Scans bright and clean, loads more shadow detail - virtually everything in Kodachrome. No flare and colour much easier to get spot on. The mechanism sounds happier for lubrication too. No more misfeeding neg carrier either, which the scanner has been mistaking for the slide carrier half the time, for about the last 4 years. I wish I'd done it earlier, as I now think I should really rescan quite a lot. Has anyone had any experience with Epson's V750M? The specs. look impressive if they hold up. No experience, but if I had the money I'd have bought one to scan the relatively small amount of 120 I have. From reading reviews the V750 is very little different from the much cheaper V700. Lens coating seems very slightly better and you get Silverfast with the 750. Most important factor appears to be stand-offs for the film carrier, which can be improvised. Personally I'd use Vuescan anyway. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk -- -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
On 19/07/2009 sn...@cox.net wrote: James wrote this last month. At the moment, I have my SS4000 apart and I have removed 10 (not 6) self-tappers but see no way to remove the carriage. I do have the lamp off, however. It was me who wrote the report originally. I removed only the lamp carrier (2 screws) and the front upper portion of the film advance housing (4 screws), then decided any further dismantling looked too hard and probably unnecessary. Access to the reflex mirror is limited, through a roughly 20mm x 15mm aperture in the bed of the film carrier, but I found it was enough to be able to thoroughly clean the mirror with a DSLR sensor cleaning pad on an angled arm (I use Green Clean, the wet pads have a plastic arm, and I heated and bent one about 45 deg). My mirror had been utterly filthy with thick dust. Once I'd done that I could shine a torch onto the mirror and was able to see the lens cell reflected. That was perfectly clean, so I left it alone. Just as well, getting to it would require an awful lot more dismantling. The only other thing I did was to wipe the parts of the coarse and fine carrier advance worm gears and support rods that I could see, using a pad with some WD40 to remove old lubricant. I then dribbled a little light machine oil onto the rods and some light grease onto the worm gears. As expected, after reassembly, the carrier movement distributed this to the areas I couldn't get to just by scanning a few frames. The sound of the mechanism changed noticeably, sounding less strained, during the first couple of scans. All the internal dust I could get at was removed at the same time, especially the little sensor notch toward the rear, LHS of the carrier mechanism. I have no idea how this sensor works - it doesn't even look like a sensor just a V-shaped notch in plastic - but that is what detects the filmstrip holder is not the mounted slide holder. Mine was filled with fluff that wanted to stay there. You can figure out where it is from the design of the Polaroid brush (which I don't have). Just cleaning that mirror has made an amazing difference to scan quality. It also now very seldom fails to correctly recognise the filmstrip holder at the first attempt. I think I've had 2 misfeeds in maybe 30 loads. It had been driving me crazy before, misfeeding about 2/3 the time. Any suggestions? Is there a site with some images of this process? I spent some time with google but was not successful. The only page I know of is http://pages.videotron.com/tiller/SS4000faults.htm which won't tell you much -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
Tony, Thanks for the details. If you ever do this again, how about a few digital images along the way :). After I removed the lamp, I tried to remove the film carrier. With the scanner oriented in the same fashion as the background shot on the website you quote below, I removed the two sheet metal caps that retain the ends of the rails. I suspect the two other screws that you refer to are under the film carriage on the left side. I marked up the background of the SS4000 Problems page and put it here: http://www.tallgrassimages.com/gallery2/gallery2/main.php?g2_itemId=590 I should have powered up the device and moved the carriage to the right--or used the suggestion of gaining access to the worm gear and moving it while powered off. Did you have to do one of those two options? Thanks Stan Tony Sleep tonysl...@halftone.co.uk wrote: It was me who wrote the report originally. I removed only the lamp carrier (2 screws) and the front upper portion of the film advance housing (4 screws), then decided any further dismantling looked too hard and probably unnecessary. Access to the reflex mirror is limited, through a roughly 20mm x 15mm aperture in the bed of the film carrier, but I found it was enough to be able to thoroughly clean the mirror with a DSLR sensor cleaning pad on an angled arm (I use Green Clean, the wet pads have a plastic arm, and I heated and bent one about 45 deg). My mirror had been utterly filthy with thick dust. Once I'd done that I could shine a torch onto the mirror and was able to see the lens cell reflected. That was perfectly clean, so I left it alone. Just as well, getting to it would require an awful lot more dismantling. The only other thing I did was to wipe the parts of the coarse and fine carrier advance worm gears and support rods that I could see, using a pad with some WD40 to remove old lubricant. I then dribbled a little light machine oil onto the rods and some light grease onto the worm gears. As expected, after reassembly, the carrier movement distributed this to the areas I couldn't get to just by scanning a few frames. The sound of the mechanism changed noticeably, sounding less strained, during the first couple of scans. All the internal dust I could get at was removed at the same time, especially the little sensor notch toward the rear, LHS of the carrier mechanism. I have no idea how this sensor works - it doesn't even look like a sensor just a V-shaped notch in plastic - but that is what detects the filmstrip holder is not the mounted slide holder. Mine was filled with fluff that wanted to stay there. You can figure out where it is from the design of the Polaroid brush (which I don't have). Just cleaning that mirror has made an amazing difference to scan quality. It also now very seldom fails to correctly recognise the filmstrip holder at the first attempt. I think I've had 2 misfeeds in maybe 30 loads. It had been driving me crazy before, misfeeding about 2/3 the time. Any suggestions? Is there a site with some images of this process? I spent some time with google but was not successful. The only page I know of is http://pages.videotron.com/tiller/SS4000faults.htm which won't tell you much -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000
To the best of my knowledge, Polaroid, or their consigns still offer service and parts for the Sprintscan 4000 scanners. Since the product was made for Polaroid by Microtek, they may also have service and parts available. I would find $50 a very low price for a properly working SS scanner. Art Michael Kersenbrock wrote: Paul Patton wrote: I thought the Polaroid Sprintscan was still highly regarded as a filmscanner. . All Polaroid scanners have been orphans for quite some time now, I'm sure that affects price. Mike K. P.S. - I've still a sprintscan 35 which is undoubtedly worth less than the postage to mail it (don't use it though, I use my Minolta Elite 5400, also an orphan -- but not for as long). :-) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: FW: Who repairs Minolta scanners
Minolta was bought by Konica, and is now called Konica-Minolta. Have you contacted them to see if they offer such service or know who does? Art pe...@galley.ie wrote: Didn't get any response before - anybody have any ideas? -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of pe...@galley.ie Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:36 PM To: pe...@galley.ie Subject: [filmscanners] Who repairs Minolta scanners Hi folks, Does anyone know who, in the UK, services Minolta scanners these days? I have a Minolta Scan Multi Pro that needs some TLC. Peter Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: FW: Who repairs Minolta scanners
Good point, I'll follow that up. Peter -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Arthur Entlich Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 8:13 AM To: pe...@galley.ie Subject: [filmscanners] Re: FW: Who repairs Minolta scanners Minolta was bought by Konica, and is now called Konica-Minolta. Have you contacted them to see if they offer such service or know who does? Art pe...@galley.ie wrote: Didn't get any response before - anybody have any ideas? -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of pe...@galley.ie Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:36 PM To: pe...@galley.ie Subject: [filmscanners] Who repairs Minolta scanners Hi folks, Does anyone know who, in the UK, services Minolta scanners these days? I have a Minolta Scan Multi Pro that needs some TLC. Peter - --- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: FW: Who repairs Minolta scanners
Arthur Entlich wrote: Minolta was bought by Konica, and is now called Konica-Minolta. Have you contacted them to see if they offer such service or know who does? Konica-Minolta, the combined version went through bankruptcy too a few years ago, that's when Sony got hold of the Minolta camera division and started with their Alpha cameras. I think K-M reduced down to making copiers and maybe some other industrial products, most of it got jettisoned. Nobody acquired the scanner division as best I can tell. Although I'm still using my K-M 5400 scanner, at least web searching yielded nothing in terms of factory support. Acquiring Minolta was a big mistake for Konica. Minolta was bleeding money and Konica wasn't able to turn them around. Or so I've read. Mike K. Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000
Paul Patton wrote: I thought the Polaroid Sprintscan was still highly regarded as a filmscanner. . All Polaroid scanners have been orphans for quite some time now, I'm sure that affects price. Mike K. P.S. - I've still a sprintscan 35 which is undoubtedly worth less than the postage to mail it (don't use it though, I use my Minolta Elite 5400, also an orphan -- but not for as long). :-) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000
On 16/07/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: The Polaroid is in worse shape for resale u nless Microtek is servicing them. As far as I know Polaroid still offer service support http://www.polaroid.com/service/index.jsp -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000
On 16/07/2009 Paul Patton wrote: I thought the Polaroid Sprintscan was still highly regarded as a filmscanner. Is it really only worth $50.00 or is my informant wrong? See items 160348227611 160345106356 - both sold at $200 BIN. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000
You need to be sure you are looking at completed sales. I have no idea what any of my film scanners are worth, but given the likelihood of a mechanical issue, I wouldn' t risk my reputation to sell a film scanner unless it has had a factory refurb. Especially true for old CCFT based scanners. The Polaroid is in worse shape for resale u nless Microtek is servicing them. --Original Messa ge-- From: Paul Patton Sender: filmscanners_ow...@h alftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com ReplyTo: filmsca nn...@halftone.co.uk Subject: [filmscanners] sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000 Sent: Jul 16, 2009 10: 29 AM I recently tried to sell a used Polaroid SprintS can 4000 film scanner using an eBay sales service. They said they couldn't sell it for me because they don't sell things worth less than $100 and they found a SprintScan 4000 on sale on ebay for $50.00. I thought the Polaroid Sprintscan was still highly regarded as a filmscanner. I s it really only worth $50.00 or is my informant wrong? - --- Unsubscribe by mail to l istser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) i n the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: sale value for used Polaroid SprintScan 4000
Google Craigslist Polaroid SprintScan 4000 - you will find a few 4000 scanners offered for sale. Paul Patton wrote: I recently tried to sell a used Polaroid SprintScan 4000 film scanner using an eBay sales service. They said they couldn't sell it for me because they don't sell things worth less than $100 and they found a SprintScan 4000 on sale on ebay for $50.00. I thought the Polaroid Sprintscan was still highly regarded as a filmscanner. Is it really only worth $50.00 or is my informant wrong? Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
So, after this discussion of drivers, etc., does anyone have any experience in actually using this scanner. I need to replace my ScanDual III so I can scan 40 or so rolls of old 35mm bw negatives. Will this scanner scan 35-mm negs to give results similar to a filmscanner? I don't have any confidence that equipment specs will adequately answer that question and would like to hear some actual experience. Preston Earle pea...@triad.rr.com www.sawdustforbrains.blogspot.com Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
I would check again on the 64-bit twain driver. Epson may have developed a proprietary driver for the scanner but I sort of doubt it was a twain driver since there were never any official standards set for the 64 bit twain driver by the twain working group consortium even though they talked about doing so and there was never any implementation of an official 64-bit twain driver although there may have been implementations of 64 bit drivers for scanners by third parties (e.g. Ed Hamrick) manufacturers as proprietary items. It is quite possible that what you got was a 64 bit WIA interface driver which allows the scanner to work with 64 bit Windows Vista machines and maybe XP. I see where there is now some discussion online about standards for a 64 bit version 2.0 twain driver set of standards (version 1 discussions were abandoned a few years ago); but the discussions do not seem to have reached a firm enough stage that there have been any fully implemented instances of such a twain driver that are working drivers issued by software developers. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of James L. Sims Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 11:55 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I have an Epson 1600, that's older than my Polaroid 120 and Epson has provided 64-bit twain drivers for it. But you're right, the 120 will have to stay with a 32-bit XP machine. Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 4:03 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. I went ahead and bought Silverfast Ai Studio for it for a variety of reasons mostly related to the difficult faded originals. They're very old filmstrips of great historical value that I'm restoring. Silverfast isn't as easy to use as Vuescan but I felt the more finely tuned results justified the high price. Btw, Silverfast had no problems recognizing the scanner either. That's because Lasersoft customizes each version for a specific scanner. Vuescan should drive virtually any scanner right out of the box. It's amazing. I made sample scans on a friend's V750 and could not discern any difference in quality between those scans and the ones on the V500 -- and I am very picky. The optics are probably better on the V750 though. Don't bother with the Epson OEM software. Either Vuescan or Silverfast are greatly superior. Your choice. On 13-Jun-09 15:43:44, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: SCSI is the hardware connection; there are no twain drivers for 64 bit OS. You need the ASPI layer with SCSI for any Windows OS (32 or 64 bit) to recognize the scanner as a hardware device ( I do not know about USB connected scanners); but this is different from getting the scanner to work which is different from getting the OS to recognize the hardware and requires device drivers. The traditional scanner and scanner drivers were and are proprietary software connected twain drivers, which are only 32 bit and will not work with 64 bit OSs. Ed Hamrick by passes the twain driver and has written his own drivers for scanners; they may be 64 bit capable. -Original Message- On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Ed Hamrick.would know the OS/software issues. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
Silverfast provides a 64-bit installer for the V500 (and presumably related Epson scanners). It's WIA and it installs both a standalone client and a plug-in for Photoshop. Silverfast also provides an optional TWAIN version but there's no reason to install it that I can see. In the flier packaged with the scanner, Epson tells you not to install from the CD. They point you to their website so you can install the latest 64-bit driver for it. That appears to be a WIA driver. Epson's OEM software is like most OEM software; it's mediocre and very basic. You need either Vuescan or Silverfast. I use Silverfast Studio Ai version 6.6. Additional comment below. On 14-Jun-09 12:41, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: I would check again on the 64-bit twain driver. Epson may have developed a proprietary driver for the scanner but I sort of doubt it was a twain driver since there were never any official standards set for the 64 bit twain driver by the twain working group consortium even though they talked about doing so and there was never any implementation of an official 64-bit twain driver although there may have been implementations of 64 bit drivers for scanners by third parties (e.g. Ed Hamrick) manufacturers as proprietary items. It is quite possible that what you got was a 64 bit WIA interface driver which allows the scanner to work with 64 bit Windows Vista machines and maybe XP. LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista There's no yes but. I explicitly stated that I installed a USB scanner so my comments applied only to that. X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. Do any prosumer manufacturers even make SCSI scanners anymore? There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. I know that. I didn't say they were the same. You might be responding to someone else's post there. I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
On 14-Jun-09 09:02, Preston Earle wrote: So, after this discussion of drivers, etc., does anyone have any experience in actually using this scanner. I need to replace my ScanDual III so I can scan 40 or so rolls of old 35mm bw negatives. Will this scanner scan 35-mm negs to give results similar to a filmscanner? I don't have any confidence that equipment specs will adequately answer that question and would like to hear some actual experience. I cannot give you a definitive answer. The only film I have run through the Epson has been very old negative stock and filmstrips that have been badly degraded by time. The originals were not sharp. I'm not sure where you could accomplish this but you need to run a sample of what you'll be scanning on an Epson to be sure it will satisfy your requirements. ICE worked well enough to eliminate superficial scratches but I had additional work in Photoshop to fully restore accurate color. My restorations probably look better than the originals did. I tried some samples on a borrowed Dimage ScanElite 5400 II and didn't like the results compared to what I obtained from the Epson. If I needed extreme sharpness (not applicable for the work I'm currently doing) I would have bought an Epson V750 instead of the V500. There are a handful of websites that provide detailed objective reviews. I suggest no relying on anyone's anecdotal evidence including mine. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
Laurie, I could be wrong calling the Epson driver a 64-bit twain driver. If memory serves me, Epson referred to it as a 64-bit driver. I did not ask for it as I was, and still am, on 32-bit machines - mainly because of the Sprintscan 120. Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: I would check again on the 64-bit twain driver. Epson may have developed a proprietary driver for the scanner but I sort of doubt it was a twain driver since there were never any official standards set for the 64 bit twain driver by the twain working group consortium even though they talked about doing so and there was never any implementation of an official 64-bit twain driver although there may have been implementations of 64 bit drivers for scanners by third parties (e.g. Ed Hamrick) manufacturers as proprietary items. It is quite possible that what you got was a 64 bit WIA interface driver which allows the scanner to work with 64 bit Windows Vista machines and maybe XP. I see where there is now some discussion online about standards for a 64 bit version 2.0 twain driver set of standards (version 1 discussions were abandoned a few years ago); but the discussions do not seem to have reached a firm enough stage that there have been any fully implemented instances of such a twain driver that are working drivers issued by software developers. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of James L. Sims Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 11:55 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I have an Epson 1600, that's older than my Polaroid 120 and Epson has provided 64-bit twain drivers for it. But you're right, the 120 will have to stay with a 32-bit XP machine. Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 4:03 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. I went ahead and bought Silverfast Ai Studio for it for a variety of reasons mostly related to the difficult faded originals. They're very old filmstrips of great historical value that I'm restoring. Silverfast isn't as easy to use as Vuescan but I felt the more finely tuned results justified the high price. Btw, Silverfast had no problems recognizing the scanner either. That's because Lasersoft customizes each version for a specific scanner. Vuescan should drive virtually any scanner right out of the box. It's amazing. I made sample scans on a friend's V750 and could not discern any difference in quality between those scans and the ones on the V500 -- and I am very picky. The optics are probably better on the V750 though. Don't bother with the Epson OEM software. Either Vuescan or Silverfast are greatly superior. Your choice. On 13-Jun-09 15:43:44, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: SCSI is the hardware connection; there are no twain drivers for 64 bit OS. You need the ASPI layer with SCSI for any Windows OS (32 or 64 bit) to recognize the scanner as a hardware device ( I do not know about USB connected scanners); but this is different from getting the scanner to work which is different from getting the OS to recognize the hardware and requires device drivers. The traditional scanner and scanner drivers were and are proprietary software connected twain drivers, which are only 32 bit and will not work with 64 bit OSs. Ed Hamrick by passes the twain driver and has written his own drivers for scanners; they may be 64 bit capable. -Original Message
[filmscanners] RE: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
caryeno...@enochsvision.com, I apologize for using your post as a vehicle for posting a correction to one of my earlier posts where I referred to WMA drivers when I should have referred to WIA drivers. I am sorry if my error in reference has caused any confusion or trouble. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 1:39 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, Silverfast provides a 64-bit installer for the V500 (and presumably related Epson scanners). It's WIA and it installs both a standalone client and a plug-in for Photoshop. Silverfast also provides an optional TWAIN version but there's no reason to install it that I can see. In the flier packaged with the scanner, Epson tells you not to install from the CD. They point you to their website so you can install the latest 64-bit driver for it. That appears to be a WIA driver. Epson's OEM software is like most OEM software; it's mediocre and very basic. You need either Vuescan or Silverfast. I use Silverfast Studio Ai version 6.6. Additional comment below. On 14-Jun-09 12:41, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: I would check again on the 64-bit twain driver. Epson may have developed a proprietary driver for the scanner but I sort of doubt it was a twain driver since there were never any official standards set for the 64 bit twain driver by the twain working group consortium even though they talked about doing so and there was never any implementation of an official 64-bit twain driver although there may have been implementations of 64 bit drivers for scanners by third parties (e.g. Ed Hamrick) manufacturers as proprietary items. It is quite possible that what you got was a 64 bit WIA interface driver which allows the scanner to work with 64 bit Windows Vista machines and maybe XP. LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista There's no yes but. I explicitly stated that I installed a USB scanner so my comments applied only to that. X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. Do any prosumer manufacturers even make SCSI scanners anymore? There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. I know that. I didn't say they were the same. You might be responding to someone else's post there. I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
Jim, Sort of a natural mistake since most people associate all scanner drivers as twain drivers, which most were when all scanners were 32 bit. Epson probably did refer to the driver as a 64-bit driver without bothering to distinguish between twain based drivers and WIA based drivers, which Microsoft has moved to for all their versions of OS since Vista. I am not sure if the drivers for Macs are twain or WIA or something else and if there are 64 bit Mac drivers available or not since I do not use a Mac. It may be that the new Mac OSs have opted to use WIA drivers as well and that one can use said drivers to work in 64 bit on their systems. I was not trying to put you or anyone else down for the confusion but was merely seeking to maintain some clarification of the various differences between ASPI layers, Twain drivers, and WIA drivers as well as their relationship to SCSI and USB interfaces and 32 bit versus 64 bit OSs and drivers. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of James L. Sims Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 5:00 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, Laurie, I could be wrong calling the Epson driver a 64-bit twain driver. If memory serves me, Epson referred to it as a 64-bit driver. I did not ask for it as I was, and still am, on 32-bit machines - mainly because of the Sprintscan 120. Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: I would check again on the 64-bit twain driver. Epson may have developed a proprietary driver for the scanner but I sort of doubt it was a twain driver since there were never any official standards set for the 64 bit twain driver by the twain working group consortium even though they talked about doing so and there was never any implementation of an official 64-bit twain driver although there may have been implementations of 64 bit drivers for scanners by third parties (e.g. Ed Hamrick) manufacturers as proprietary items. It is quite possible that what you got was a 64 bit WIA interface driver which allows the scanner to work with 64 bit Windows Vista machines and maybe XP. I see where there is now some discussion online about standards for a 64 bit version 2.0 twain driver set of standards (version 1 discussions were abandoned a few years ago); but the discussions do not seem to have reached a firm enough stage that there have been any fully implemented instances of such a twain driver that are working drivers issued by software developers. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of James L. Sims Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 11:55 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I have an Epson 1600, that's older than my Polaroid 120 and Epson has provided 64-bit twain drivers for it. But you're right, the 120 will have to stay with a 32-bit XP machine. Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 4:03 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. I went ahead and bought Silverfast Ai Studio for it for a variety of reasons mostly related to the difficult faded originals. They're very old filmstrips of great historical value that I'm restoring. Silverfast isn't as easy to use as Vuescan but I felt the more finely tuned results justified the high price. Btw, Silverfast had no problems recognizing the scanner either. That's because Lasersoft customizes each
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
No problems at all. I learn something every time I post on this group, Laurie. Thanks to everyone! Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: caryeno...@enochsvision.com, I apologize for using your post as a vehicle for posting a correction to one of my earlier posts where I referred to WMA drivers when I should have referred to WIA drivers. I am sorry if my error in reference has caused any confusion or trouble. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 1:39 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, Silverfast provides a 64-bit installer for the V500 (and presumably related Epson scanners). It's WIA and it installs both a standalone client and a plug-in for Photoshop. Silverfast also provides an optional TWAIN version but there's no reason to install it that I can see. In the flier packaged with the scanner, Epson tells you not to install from the CD. They point you to their website so you can install the latest 64-bit driver for it. That appears to be a WIA driver. Epson's OEM software is like most OEM software; it's mediocre and very basic. You need either Vuescan or Silverfast. I use Silverfast Studio Ai version 6.6. Additional comment below. On 14-Jun-09 12:41, LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: I would check again on the 64-bit twain driver. Epson may have developed a proprietary driver for the scanner but I sort of doubt it was a twain driver since there were never any official standards set for the 64 bit twain driver by the twain working group consortium even though they talked about doing so and there was never any implementation of an official 64-bit twain driver although there may have been implementations of 64 bit drivers for scanners by third parties (e.g. Ed Hamrick) manufacturers as proprietary items. It is quite possible that what you got was a 64 bit WIA interface driver which allows the scanner to work with 64 bit Windows Vista machines and maybe XP. LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista There's no yes but. I explicitly stated that I installed a USB scanner so my comments applied only to that. X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. Do any prosumer manufacturers even make SCSI scanners anymore? There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. I know that. I didn't say they were the same. You might be responding to someone else's post there. I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
On 14-Jun-09 17:29:42, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: caryeno...@enochsvision.com, I apologize for using your post as a vehicle for posting a correction to one of my earlier posts where I referred to WMA drivers when I should have referred to WIA drivers. I am sorry if my error in reference has caused any confusion or trouble. No trouble at all. Thanks. If I had written my initial more reply more carefully then I wouldn't have confused anyone. I should know better. I was a technical writer for many years -- at Microsoft -- in what they used to call the Backoffice Division. I wrote sections of the Resource Kit on the Windows Registry and managed the team that wrote the Error Messages volume. Over the years they have discarded many more great features than they ever shipped. Like IBM and other giants, the bigger they got, the less efficient they became. I'm looking forward to Vista 2.0 aka Windows 7. By my count, it's really Windows 16. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
On 14-Jun-09 17:41:19, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: Jim, Sort of a natural mistake since most people associate all scanner drivers as twain drivers, which most were when all scanners were 32 bit. Epson probably did refer to the driver as a 64-bit driver without bothering to distinguish between twain based drivers and WIA based drivers, which Microsoft has moved to for all their versions of OS since Vista. Epson only refers to their drivers generically, i.e. 64-bit drivers. I am only assuming that they are WIA because that seems logical. Silverfast provides a 64-bit TWAIN version for the Epson. I don't know why they went to the extra trouble of creating an alternative 64-bit TWAIN version unless possibly certain programs need them. Photoshop CS3 and CS4 are WIA friendly. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
On 14/06/2009 Preston Earle wrote: I need to replace my ScanDual III so I can scan 40 or so rolls of old 35mm bw negatives. Will this scanner scan 35-mm negs to give results similar to a filmscanner? According to at least one review I read, IIRC the answer was a qualified 'yes' for the V700/V750, at least for medium format - there was a direct comparison with a Nikonscan 8000. See the V750 and V700 reviews at http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Menus/reviews.htm -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
From: Tony Sleep tonysl...@halftone.co.uk On 14/06/2009 Preston Earle wrote: I need to replace my ScanDual III so I can scan 40 or so rolls of old 35mm bw negatives. Will this scanner scan 35-mm negs to give results similar to a filmscanner? According to at least one review I read, IIRC the answer was a qualified 'yes' for the V700/V750, at least for medium format - there was a direct comparison with a Nikonscan 8000. See the V750 and V700 reviews at http://www.photo-i.co.uk/Menus/reviews.htm FWIW, I found the DoF on the V700 to be very narrow, making film height and flatness critical. At it's best, it's surprisingly close to the Nikon 8000, but persuading the film to be flat without wet mounting might be hard. David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
On 13/06/2009 James L. Sims wrote: With the support for my Polaroid Sprintscan 120 now unavailable, I am looking for a replacement. Vuescan should resolve antique s/w issues on Windows, though SCSI support may become more awkward I believe ASPI drivers are available for Vista. On Mac I don't know with current OSX, but similar was possible. Same applies to SCSI Nikons etc. Regarding physical service, I recently popped the lid off my Polaroid 4000 (4 lever tabs) as it seemed to have got rather flary and low contrast with some strongly backlit slides that included bright backgrounds, despite living under a dust cover when not in use. Half a dozen self-tappers later and I was able to remove the lamp holder and the top of the film carrier carriage. I was then able to clean the angled mirror with a DSLR sensor swab - it was covered in a thick layer of dust. Inspection with a torch showed the lens to be clean, reflected in the mirror. I then cleaned every trace of dust and dirt from the mechanism surfaces I could get at, and wiped and re-lubricated the helical carriage advance screws. Result : a total transformation! Scans bright and clean, loads more shadow detail - virtually everything in Kodachrome. No flare and colour much easier to get spot on. The mechanism sounds happier for lubrication too. No more misfeeding neg carrier either, which the scanner has been mistaking for the slide carrier half the time, for about the last 4 years. I wish I'd done it earlier, as I now think I should really rescan quite a lot. Has anyone had any experience with Epson's V750M? The specs. look impressive if they hold up. No experience, but if I had the money I'd have bought one to scan the relatively small amount of 120 I have. From reading reviews the V750 is very little different from the much cheaper V700. Lens coating seems very slightly better and you get Silverfast with the 750. Most important factor appears to be stand-offs for the film carrier, which can be improvised. Personally I'd use Vuescan anyway. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
Ed Hamrick.would know the OS/software issues. There i s something funny about scsi and aspi. For X64, I had to search the net and load some 3rd party ASPI stuff to run my usb scanner. Yes, I know this doesn't make sense, but I guess scsi is than a physical interface. That pc is in pieces at the moment, but I can probably find the stu ff I had to load once it is running again. -Origin al Message- From: Tony Sleep tonysl...@halftone.c o.uk Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:48:56 To: li...@laz ygranch.com Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfectio n V750-M Pro Scanner, On 13/06/2009 James L. Sims wrot e: With the support for my Polaroid Sprintscan 120 now unavailable, I am looking for a replacement. Vuesc an should resolve antique s/w issues on Windows, though S CSI support may become more awkward I believe ASPI drive rs are available for Vista. On Mac I don't know with cur rent OSX, but similar was possible. Same applies to SCSI Nikons etc. Regarding physical service, I recently po pped the lid off my Polaroid 4000 (4 lever tabs) as it s eemed to have got rather flary and low contrast with som e strongly backlit slides that included bright background s, despite living under a dust cover when not in use. Half a dozen self-tappers later and I was able to remov e the lamp holder and the top of the film carrier carria ge. I was then able to clean the angled mirror with a DS LR sensor swab - it was covered in a thick layer of dust . Inspection with a torch showed the lens to be clean, re flected in the mirror. I then cleaned every trace of dus t and dirt from the mechanism surfaces I could get at, a nd wiped and re-lubricated the helical carriage advance screws. Result : a total transformation! Scans bright and clean, loads more shadow detail - virtually everythi ng in Kodachrome. No flare and colour much easier to get spot on. The mechanism sounds happier for lubrication to o. No more misfeeding neg carrier either, which the scan ner has been mistaking for the slide carrier half the ti me, for about the last 4 years. I wish I'd done it earli er, as I now think I should really rescan quite a lot. Has anyone had any experience with Epson's V750M? The specs. look impressive if they hold up. No exper ience, but if I had the money I'd have bought one to scan the relatively small amount of 120 I have. From reading reviews the V750 is very little different from the much cheaper V700. Lens coating seems very slightly better a nd you get Silverfast with the 750. Most important factor appears to be stand-offs for the film carrier, which ca n be improvised. Personally I'd use Vuescan anyway. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk --- - Unsubscribe by mail to list ser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' o r 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in t he message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
This is very encouraging, Tony. I have had my ancient SS4000 under a cover for several years as well, and I'm sure it could use a similar cleaning. I may give it a try. I take it that re-assembly was not a great problem? Cheers, Roger Smith On 13-Jun-09, at 12:48 PM, Tony Sleep wrote: On 13/06/2009 James L. Sims wrote: With the support for my Polaroid Sprintscan 120 now unavailable, I am looking for a replacement. Vuescan should resolve antique s/w issues on Windows, though SCSI support may become more awkward I believe ASPI drivers are available for Vista. On Mac I don't know with current OSX, but similar was possible. Same applies to SCSI Nikons etc. Regarding physical service, I recently popped the lid off my Polaroid 4000 (4 lever tabs) as it seemed to have got rather flary and low contrast with some strongly backlit slides that included bright backgrounds, despite living under a dust cover when not in use. Half a dozen self-tappers later and I was able to remove the lamp holder and the top of the film carrier carriage. I was then able to clean the angled mirror with a DSLR sensor swab - it was covered in a thick layer of dust. Inspection with a torch showed the lens to be clean, reflected in the mirror. I then cleaned every trace of dust and dirt from the mechanism surfaces I could get at, and wiped and re-lubricated the helical carriage advance screws. Result : a total transformation! Scans bright and clean, loads more shadow detail - virtually everything in Kodachrome. No flare and colour much easier to get spot on. The mechanism sounds happier for lubrication too. No more misfeeding neg carrier either, which the scanner has been mistaking for the slide carrier half the time, for about the last 4 years. I wish I'd done it earlier, as I now think I should really rescan quite a lot. Has anyone had any experience with Epson's V750M? The specs. look impressive if they hold up. No experience, but if I had the money I'd have bought one to scan the relatively small amount of 120 I have. From reading reviews the V750 is very little different from the much cheaper V700. Lens coating seems very slightly better and you get Silverfast with the 750. Most important factor appears to be stand-offs for the film carrier, which can be improvised. Personally I'd use Vuescan anyway. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk -- -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
SCSI is the hardware connection; there are no twain drivers for 64 bit OS. You need the ASPI layer with SCSI for any Windows OS (32 or 64 bit) to recognize the scanner as a hardware device ( I do not know about USB connected scanners); but this is different from getting the scanner to work which is different from getting the OS to recognize the hardware and requires device drivers. The traditional scanner and scanner drivers were and are proprietary software connected twain drivers, which are only 32 bit and will not work with 64 bit OSs. Ed Hamrick by passes the twain driver and has written his own drivers for scanners; they may be 64 bit capable. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 2:07 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, Ed Hamrick.would know the OS/software issues. There i s something funny about scsi and aspi. For X64, I had to search the net and load some 3rd party ASPI stuff to run my usb scanner. Yes, I know this doesn't make sense, but I guess scsi is than a physical interface. That pc is in pieces at the moment, but I can probably find the stu ff I had to load once it is running again. -Origin al Message- From: Tony Sleep tonysl...@halftone.c o.uk Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 16:48:56 To: li...@laz ygranch.com Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfectio n V750-M Pro Scanner, On 13/06/2009 James L. Sims wrot e: With the support for my Polaroid Sprintscan 120 now unavailable, I am looking for a replacement. Vuesc an should resolve antique s/w issues on Windows, though S CSI support may become more awkward I believe ASPI drive rs are available for Vista. On Mac I don't know with cur rent OSX, but similar was possible. Same applies to SCSI Nikons etc. Regarding physical service, I recently po pped the lid off my Polaroid 4000 (4 lever tabs) as it s eemed to have got rather flary and low contrast with som e strongly backlit slides that included bright background s, despite living under a dust cover when not in use. Half a dozen self-tappers later and I was able to remov e the lamp holder and the top of the film carrier carria ge. I was then able to clean the angled mirror with a DS LR sensor swab - it was covered in a thick layer of dust . Inspection with a torch showed the lens to be clean, re flected in the mirror. I then cleaned every trace of dus t and dirt from the mechanism surfaces I could get at, a nd wiped and re-lubricated the helical carriage advance screws. Result : a total transformation! Scans bright and clean, loads more shadow detail - virtually everythi ng in Kodachrome. No flare and colour much easier to get spot on. The mechanism sounds happier for lubrication to o. No more misfeeding neg carrier either, which the scan ner has been mistaking for the slide carrier half the ti me, for about the last 4 years. I wish I'd done it earli er, as I now think I should really rescan quite a lot. Has anyone had any experience with Epson's V750M? The specs. look impressive if they hold up. No exper ience, but if I had the money I'd have bought one to scan the relatively small amount of 120 I have. From reading reviews the V750 is very little different from the much cheaper V700. Lens coating seems very slightly better a nd you get Silverfast with the 750. Most important factor appears to be stand-offs for the film carrier, which ca n be improvised. Personally I'd use Vuescan anyway. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk --- - Unsubscribe by mail to list ser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' o r 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in t he message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. I went ahead and bought Silverfast Ai Studio for it for a variety of reasons mostly related to the difficult faded originals. They're very old filmstrips of great historical value that I'm restoring. Silverfast isn't as easy to use as Vuescan but I felt the more finely tuned results justified the high price. Btw, Silverfast had no problems recognizing the scanner either. That's because Lasersoft customizes each version for a specific scanner. Vuescan should drive virtually any scanner right out of the box. It's amazing. I made sample scans on a friend's V750 and could not discern any difference in quality between those scans and the ones on the V500 -- and I am very picky. The optics are probably better on the V750 though. Don't bother with the Epson OEM software. Either Vuescan or Silverfast are greatly superior. Your choice. On 13-Jun-09 15:43:44, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: SCSI is the hardware connection; there are no twain drivers for 64 bit OS. You need the ASPI layer with SCSI for any Windows OS (32 or 64 bit) to recognize the scanner as a hardware device ( I do not know about USB connected scanners); but this is different from getting the scanner to work which is different from getting the OS to recognize the hardware and requires device drivers. The traditional scanner and scanner drivers were and are proprietary software connected twain drivers, which are only 32 bit and will not work with 64 bit OSs. Ed Hamrick by passes the twain driver and has written his own drivers for scanners; they may be 64 bit capable. -Original Message- On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Ed Hamrick.would know the OS/software issues. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
X64 is an oddball OS. Really a bastardized version of server2003. I can't wait to get rid of it for Windows 7. X64 predates Vista64, but was supposed to be easily (cough cough) upgraded to Vista. Well, it required a new install and for the longest time the drivers were better under X64 than Vista-64. Then Vista was proclaimed to suck, so I stayed with X64. On usenet, the old X64 users have proclaimed Windows 7 to be the 2nd coming of the messiah of your choice. Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
On 13/06/2009 Roger Smith wrote: This is very encouraging, Tony. I have had my ancient SS4000 under a cover for several years as well, and I'm sure it could use a similar cleaning. I may give it a try. I take it that re-assembly was not a great problem? It's easy. 4 plastic spring clips release the cover (use a flat-bladed screwdriver to lever the tangs inward, and another to lift the lid slightly). As you remove it, just bear in mind that that lid/top remains attached to the innards by the wiring loom at the front LH corner. Then you need a small Philips screwdriver. 2 screws to remove the 'saddle' that contains the lamp (leave wires attached, just lift it to one side), and 4 to remove the top plastic part of the film carrier mechanism/stepper motor cover. That will give you just about enough room to see the small rectangular hole in the chassis with the angled mirror underneath. I tried removing the dust 'dry' but it was futile, a wet DSLR sensor cleaning pad on a bent plastic arm did the job. A lens tissue with lens cleaning fluid would do just as well. Be gentle, it's surface silvered. With the helicoid, I just wiped off as much old, dry lubricant that I could get to with a bit of cloth wrapped round some stiff wire damped with WD40, then smeared on a little light grease. There are also some visible metal guide rods for the carriage. I wiped those with lint-free cloth and then used a brush with a little light oil. You can't clean and re-lube the whole length of either the helicoid thread nor the guide rods, but operation will distribute the fresh lubricant one you have it back together. All other dust was removed with a dry brush then the used DSLR pad, then the bits and lid replaced. A 10minute job -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Cleaning SS4000 scanner
I too found the same thing. Even though covered up the mirror got really dusty and the scans were really poor. Tony's instructions are pretty much what I had to do and I used denatured alcohol with a small piece of lint-free optical cloth. Just be sure not to get the swab or whatever you use too moist as drops will form on the mirror and the cleaning solution/alcohol will drip into things is shouldn't. I guess I have another question - has anyone compared their SS4000 slide scans to the Epson V750/V700? I find the SS4000 to be terribly slow. I'm looking to archive a couple of years of slides and there's no way I want to do it with the SS4000. I'd like to mount as many as possible and do a batch scan if possible. So I'm looking at the Epson V750/V700 or perhaps picking up a Nikon Coolscan 5000 + slide feeder and then selling it after I'm done. I'd be using Vuescan. Thanks - John Roger Smith wrote: This is very encouraging, Tony. I have had my ancient SS4000 under a cover for several years as well, and I'm sure it could use a similar cleaning. I may give it a try. I take it that re-assembly was not a great problem? Cheers, Roger Smith On 13-Jun-09, at 12:48 PM, Tony Sleep wrote: On 13/06/2009 James L. Sims wrote: With the support for my Polaroid Sprintscan 120 now unavailable, I am looking for a replacement. Vuescan should resolve antique s/w issues on Windows, though SCSI support may become more awkward I believe ASPI drivers are available for Vista. On Mac I don't know with current OSX, but similar was possible. Same applies to SCSI Nikons etc. Regarding physical service, I recently popped the lid off my Polaroid 4000 (4 lever tabs) as it seemed to have got rather flary and low contrast with some strongly backlit slides that included bright backgrounds, despite living under a dust cover when not in use. Half a dozen self-tappers later and I was able to remove the lamp holder and the top of the film carrier carriage. I was then able to clean the angled mirror with a DSLR sensor swab - it was covered in a thick layer of dust. Inspection with a torch showed the lens to be clean, reflected in the mirror. I then cleaned every trace of dust and dirt from the mechanism surfaces I could get at, and wiped and re-lubricated the helical carriage advance screws. Result : a total transformation! Scans bright and clean, loads more shadow detail - virtually everything in Kodachrome. No flare and colour much easier to get spot on. The mechanism sounds happier for lubrication too. No more misfeeding neg carrier either, which the scanner has been mistaking for the slide carrier half the time, for about the last 4 years. I wish I'd done it earlier, as I now think I should really rescan quite a lot. Has anyone had any experience with Epson's V750M? The specs. look impressive if they hold up. No experience, but if I had the money I'd have bought one to scan the relatively small amount of 120 I have. From reading reviews the V750 is very little different from the much cheaper V700. Lens coating seems very slightly better and you get Silverfast with the 750. Most important factor appears to be stand-offs for the film carrier, which can be improvised. Personally I'd use Vuescan anyway. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk -- -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body -- John Karen Hinkey hin...@seanet.com Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
Win 7 is what Vista was suppose to be and should have been unless they screw it up between now and its public release in Oct. 2009. As I noted before, there are no 64 bit twain drivers and never have been any. So scanners typically could not be used with the 64 bit OSs unless the maker supplied a proprietary driver which would allow the scanner to work with the bundled scanner software but would not permit one to scan from within third party applications like Photoshop as a Twain driver would. The driver issue with Windows x64 and Vista 64 was and is different from the ASPI layer problem which allowed the OSs to recognized the actual physical device with SCSI based devices. Here the problem was a short feud between Microsoft and Adaptec where Microsoft stopped including the Adaptec ASPI layer (which Adaptec developed and owned) in the Windows OSs. During this brief feud, Microsoft attempted to develop their ow2n version of the ASPI layer; but most SCSI scanners would not recognize it or support it; hence people needed to download from Adaptec the ASPI layer software code and install it in the Windows OSs. Later, the feud ended and Microsoft again supported the Adaptec ASPI layer code. However, by then scanners were dropping the SCSI connection and turning to USB; and Microsoft began developing its own non-twain WMA driver criteria which was introduced in Vista 32 and 64 bit editions, dropping support for 32 bit twain drivers, which will still work in 32 bit Vista but were not included in box with it. Win 7 32 bit and 64 bit will no longer support 32 bit twain drivers or furnish them in box with the OS. Moreover, scanner manufacturers have introduced in their newer models USB based scanners, dropping SCSI, and new WMA drivers (both 32 and 64 bit drivers) for the newly introduced models; but they have not made any attempt to develop said drivers for their older models. Thus unless you are running 32 bit XP or Vista in virtual mode under Win 7 or running a dual boot system, you may not be able to use your old 32 bit twain driver based scanners in the new Microsoft OSs -especially the 64 bit versions. You should be aware, if you are not already, that the upgrade path from XP to Win 7 will (a) require a clean install of Win 7, although there should be many more 64 bit drivers available than there was for X64 or Vista 64, or (b) necessitate a upgrade from X64 to Vista 64 before upgrading from Vista to Win 7. One will not be able to directly upgrade from X64 to Win 7 and have all the settings and registry entries transferred automatically. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 5:50 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, X64 is an oddball OS. Really a bastardized version of server2003. I can't wait to get rid of it for Windows 7. X64 predates Vista64, but was supposed to be easily (cough cough) upgraded to Vista. Well, it required a new install and for the longest time the drivers were better under X64 than Vista-64. Then Vista was proclaimed to suck, so I stayed with X64. On usenet, the old X64 users have proclaimed Windows 7 to be the 2nd coming of the messiah of your choice. Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 4:03 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. I went ahead and bought Silverfast Ai Studio for it for a variety of reasons mostly related to the difficult faded originals. They're very old filmstrips of great historical value that I'm restoring. Silverfast isn't as easy to use as Vuescan but I felt the more finely tuned results justified the high price. Btw, Silverfast had no problems recognizing the scanner either. That's because Lasersoft customizes each version for a specific scanner. Vuescan should drive virtually any scanner right out of the box. It's amazing. I made sample scans on a friend's V750 and could not discern any difference in quality between those scans and the ones on the V500 -- and I am very picky. The optics are probably better on the V750 though. Don't bother with the Epson OEM software. Either Vuescan or Silverfast are greatly superior. Your choice. On 13-Jun-09 15:43:44, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: SCSI is the hardware connection; there are no twain drivers for 64 bit OS. You need the ASPI layer with SCSI for any Windows OS (32 or 64 bit) to recognize the scanner as a hardware device ( I do not know about USB connected scanners); but this is different from getting the scanner to work which is different from getting the OS to recognize the hardware and requires device drivers. The traditional scanner and scanner drivers were and are proprietary software connected twain drivers, which are only 32 bit and will not work with 64 bit OSs. Ed Hamrick by passes the twain driver and has written his own drivers for scanners; they may be 64 bit capable. -Original Message- On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Ed Hamrick.would know the OS/software issues. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner,
I have an Epson 1600, that's older than my Polaroid 120 and Epson has provided 64-bit twain drivers for it. But you're right, the 120 will have to stay with a 32-bit XP machine. Jim LAURIE SOLOMON wrote: Yes; but you are talking about a relatively new USB based scanner and Vista X64. It is quite possible that this newer model scanner uses either third party drivers developed by people like Ed Hemrick or has Epson developed WMA drivers which are designed for Vista X32 and X64 bit versions. Being USB based and not SCSI based peripherals, you probably did not need to use an ASPI layer to get the OSD to recognize the hardware device as was the case with SCSI based scanners of old. There is a difference between drivers which enable software applications to work a peripheral device and such things as software code such as ASPI layers which enable the OS to recognize the existence of the physical device; the two are not the same. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of caryeno...@enochsvision.com Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2009 4:03 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Epson Perfection V750-M Pro Scanner, I didn't have to do anything to get my new Epson V500 scanner to work in Vista-x64. I used the installation CD and then immediately installed the 64-bit updates that I downloaded from the Epson support pages. Then I turned the scanner on. Windows made the low beep that it does when it recognizes any USB device and that was it. The scanner works perfectly in Vuescan Prof. It was recognized immediately. Environment: Vista Ultimate-x64/SP2, 8 GB RAM. I went ahead and bought Silverfast Ai Studio for it for a variety of reasons mostly related to the difficult faded originals. They're very old filmstrips of great historical value that I'm restoring. Silverfast isn't as easy to use as Vuescan but I felt the more finely tuned results justified the high price. Btw, Silverfast had no problems recognizing the scanner either. That's because Lasersoft customizes each version for a specific scanner. Vuescan should drive virtually any scanner right out of the box. It's amazing. I made sample scans on a friend's V750 and could not discern any difference in quality between those scans and the ones on the V500 -- and I am very picky. The optics are probably better on the V750 though. Don't bother with the Epson OEM software. Either Vuescan or Silverfast are greatly superior. Your choice. On 13-Jun-09 15:43:44, LAURIE SOLOMON (lau...@advancenet.net) wrote: SCSI is the hardware connection; there are no twain drivers for 64 bit OS. You need the ASPI layer with SCSI for any Windows OS (32 or 64 bit) to recognize the scanner as a hardware device ( I do not know about USB connected scanners); but this is different from getting the scanner to work which is different from getting the OS to recognize the hardware and requires device drivers. The traditional scanner and scanner drivers were and are proprietary software connected twain drivers, which are only 32 bit and will not work with 64 bit OSs. Ed Hamrick by passes the twain driver and has written his own drivers for scanners; they may be 64 bit capable. -Original Message- On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Ed Hamrick.would know the OS/software issues. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein, Enoch's Vision Inc. http://www.enochsvision.com Blog: http://www.enochsvision.net - Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. (Joseph Campbell) Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Polaroid SS4000 tube
On 04/06/2009 Charles Knox wrote: An extensive search for cold cathode tubes (including both Polaroid and Microtek) didn't bring up anything remotely like it. Any help would be appreciated. Philips are the OEM of most scanner tubes, however identifying and sourcing it may be difficult if it is unmarked. You may have to buy through either Polaroid or Microtek. Polaroid http://www.polaroid.com/service/index.jsp - use the 'Contact us' link I guess. I have sourced lamps for a Microtek35 many years ago. Microtek was happy enough to sell to an end user, but it was 3x the price of the Philips part. The Microtek version had part of the tube painted black to cut flare. I bought the Philips part, ordered through a Philips dealer, and applied the paint myself and it worked fine. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Polaroid SS4000 tube
Thanks, Tony. Have contacted the local (Australian) Microtek site — no reply as yet. Regards Charles At 11:42 AM 6/4/2009 +0100, you wrote: On 04/06/2009 Charles Knox wrote: An extensive search for cold cathode tubes (including both Polaroid and Microtek) didn't bring up anything remotely like it. Any help would be appreciated. Philips are the OEM of most scanner tubes, however identifying and sourcing it may be difficult if it is unmarked. You may have to buy through either Polaroid or Microtek. Polaroid http://www.polaroid.com/service/index.jsp - use the 'Contact us' link I guess. I have sourced lamps for a Microtek35 many years ago. Microtek was happy enough to sell to an end user, but it was 3x the price of the Philips part. The Microtek version had part of the tube painted black to cut flare. I bought the Philips part, ordered through a Philips dealer, and applied the paint myself and it worked fine. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk --- - Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
Both methods (printing and looking) are too subjective for my taste in regard to this issue. I'd really like to see a objective map of the changes. My personal sense is that jpeg is much better than most people give it credit for. It was designed with human vision in mind, so it does more damage to the color than the luminosity because we have relatively poor color vision, but we have good luminosity sensitivity. We are much more aware of contrast and edge sharpness than subtle gradients of color. Art gary wrote: How about just changing the opacity and slide between one version and the other, and look for differences. I don't think printing is as accurate as looking on a monitor. Preston Earle wrote: Arthur Entlich asked: Anyone have a good idea how to check two images for changes against one another such that hue, color, contrast, brightness or any value change to a pixel would show up clearly as a changed pixel when comparing two images on top of one another? I would like to see a quantitative visual indication of each pixel that is altered by a certain jpeg setting relative to the non-jpegged tiff. - One thought: flatten the black image and look at the Levels of that file. I think you'll find a lot of pixels of 0, 1, and 2 values. I suspect there will be few pixels of 6 or more value. This will give some idea of the quantity of changes in the JPEG file. (or maybe 255, etc., values. I never can remember whether 0 is black or white.) Second thought: make the best print possible of the two files and compare the two prints. This will give some idea of the quality of the changes. If you can see the difference in the two files without looking at the files at 200+% on pixel-for-pixel basis, I'd say you've got better eyes than 100% of other folks in the world. For really poor slides that need a lot of post processing, I think it makes sense to start with a TIFF file and convert to JPEG only after all image correction has been done. For slides where the first scan look pretty good, I doubt you can do any reasonable changes that would show a difference in starting with a JPEG or TIFF. Preston Earle pea...@triad.rr.com www.sawdustforbrains.blogspot.com Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: More settings questions
RGBI would make sense for raw, but I assume you are going do to light IR cleanup. I'd would use neutral. It compensates a bit for the dynamic range of the film. Personally, if I were to do what you are doing, i.e. batch scanning, I would do it raw and RGBI TIFF. But if you just want to save RGB, put the IR cleaning on light and use neutral. Carlisle Landel wrote: Bunch, OK, the TB drive has been ordered, I'm almost ready to go. A few more setting questions. TIFF file type: The choices are 24, 48 and 64 bit RGBI. Which one do I choose? Use a Vuescan color balance preset, or set to none? Thanks again for the help. Carlisle Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings--Thanks!
Carlisle Landel wrote: Bunch, Wow! The list lives! Thanks to all for the advice. Especiallly, thanks for the reminder that IR filtering doesn't work for Kodachrome. I've got the bulk slide feeder, so the plan is to simply drop a box of slides in and start it up, then go away and drop another in when I get to it. I figure if I do a couple of boxes an evening, it'll eventually get done. I'm going with the memory is cheap theory and will use the 4000dpi TIFF settings. Best regards, Carlisle My memory seems to be that in some circumstances -- involving generations of KC or generations of IR or a combination of the two -- allowed for some success. Sorry to be so vague but it may be worth a try to see what happens. j Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
I'd like to point out that I never had a Seagate product fail. Of course, that could be luck. They come with 5 year warranties. Of course, I probably just cursed one of my drives by mentioning I had no failures. I've built PCs for people that would spend the extra money for a Seagate and had the drives arrive DOA. More than once mind you. One was from IBM, and the other Fujitsu, a company I thought had it's act together. If you get external drives, consider spending a bit more and get esata. I have this general distrust of USB. http://www.carbonite.com/ These people advertise heavily on http://techguylabs.com/radio/pmwiki.php I have no idea if the service is any good, but it is online offsite storage, and relatively cheap. Offer code I believe is Leo, but you could just listen to any of his podcasts and get the code. The offsite service is handy in the event of fire or theft. Tony Sleep wrote: On 26/02/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: I just bought three 1.5 terrabyte drives RAID can add resilience but no way can it be considered safe, so don't forget the other 4! Here I have: 3 x 1TB RAID3 = 2TB 2 x 1TB for backup (on another LAN PC) 2 x 1TB for offsite backup. So that's 7 x 1TB for 2TB of storage. I don't trust HDD's much. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
There is DVD+R and DVD-R. For technical reasons, +R is pr eferred. DVD-RAM is to be avoided. I have had the sam e issue regarding an unreadable DVD, and I always run a v erify. However, the reader was my own notebook. ;-) Peopl e tend to upgrade their desktop burners more often than n otebooks, so sending DVD hasn't been much of an issue. Nowadays, most publishers have ftp. --Original Message-- From: Tony Sleep Sender: filmscanners_ow n...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com ReplyTo: fi lmscann...@halftone.co.uk Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Ad vice on scanner settings Sent: Feb 26, 2009 8:43 AM O n 26/02/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: I font follow your reason for rejecting DVDs. Granted at 4 GBytes, they aren't big these days. I don't trust DVD stabilit y/longevity at all. I've had quality branded DVD's corru pt themselves after as little as 3m or fail to read on a drive other than the one that created them (though that' s an older problem from early days). Worst example wa s one that I drove to a client 40mls away, on a very urg ent deadline. It had verified and test loaded fine here o n 2 different drives, and they couldn't read it, they co uld only see the directory entries. I had to go back hom e, burn another and drive back again. Later I tried the problem disk and I couldn't open the files either. It rea lly put me off DVD, unlike CD, where I have never had a disk go bad in up to (so far) 13 years. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk - - -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halfton e.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message tit le or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Advice on scanner settings
From my understanding JPEG 2000 is a dead fish in terms of support and adoptions. If my understanding is correct, you would wind up with orphaned files that neither you nor anyone else would be able to open and read in the future; not good for archives. :-) The standard JPEG and the TIFF are at least universal and established formats that are supported by almost all programs and are likely to be so in the future. You are should do the LWZ tiff. I am not sure what you are trying to say here. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:52 AM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings You can JPEG2000, which has a lossless option. I would have to research it, but I think it only uses 8 per color. You are should do the LWZ tiff. Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: Advice on scanner settings
Encryption can be done locally; but what can be encrypted can be unencrypted if someone really wants to. Given the rash of allegedly secure information that has managed to get publically distributed these days with respect to major supposedly high security operations such as banks, corporations, governmental agencies that have lost confidential secure data, I would not dismiss security as being not much of an issue. Of course there is always the problem of the hard drives and storage facilities at these online off-location data storage operations going bad, going down when you need to retrieve the data, or just getting corrupted despite any and all precautions. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:57 AM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings Security isn't much of an issue these days since you coul d encrypt locally. Goin out of business is very likely. M ediastor was in the same business and went under. -Original Message- From: LAURIE SOLOMON lau...@ad VANCENET.NET Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:23:29 To: l i...@lazygranch.com Subject: [filmscanners] RE: Advice on scanner settings I'd like to point out that I neve r had a Seagate product fail. Of course, that could be luck. They come with 5 year warranties. I have had a c ouple of them go bad; but I have had a number of brands g o bad. Hard drives after all are mechanical devices; an d their internal parts do wear out, do get damaged, and do get overheated. Some brands go bad sooner than others even if they have extended long warrantees. When they d o it is a pain to send them back for warrantee service a nd to lose the data on them. The offsite service is handy in the event of fire or theft. Yes, except if th ey go out of business or have security issues, which are distinct possibilities in this day and age. Like so man y others, I have found that many services offer good rat es and terms, good service and security, and the like wh en they are new and trying to establish themselves and a client base. However after the introductory offer or pe riod, things change with pricing going up, terms changin g, service and security declining, etc. By then, you ca n terminate your service or move to a different online s torage operation if things change to your disliking; but they count on the inconvenience factor and inertia to ke ep you even if things change for the worst. Most people overstay their welcome due to the inconvenience of movi ng their data from those storage facilities to new ones or purchasing additional drives to store the data on at h ome or at an external location like a bank vault. - Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halft one.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of gary Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 2:05 AM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings I'd like to point out that I never had a Seagate product fail. Of course, that coul d be luck. They come with 5 year warranties. Of course , I probably just cursed one of my drives by mentioning I had no failures. I've built PCs for people that would s pend the extra money for a Seagate and had the drives ar rive DOA. More than once mind you. One was from IBM, and the other Fujitsu, a company I thought had it's act tog ether. If you get external drives, consider spending a bit more and get esata. I have this general distrust of USB. http://www.carbonite.com/ These people advertis e heavily on http://techguylabs.com/radio/pmwiki.php I have no idea if the service is any good, but it is onli ne offsite storage, and relatively cheap. Offer code I b elieve is Leo, but you could just listen to any of his p odcasts and get the code. The offsite service is handy in the event of fire or theft. Tony Sleep wrote : On 26/02/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: I just bought three 1.5 terrabyte drives RAID can add res ilience but no way can it be considered safe, so don't forget the other 4! Here I have: 3 x 1TB RAID3 = 2TB 2 x 1TB for backup (on another LAN PC) 2 x 1T B for offsite backup. So that's 7 x 1TB for 2TB of storage. I don't trust HDD's much. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk --- - Unsubscribe by mail to listse r...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in th e message title or body --- - Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, w ith 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscann ers_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
I'm ageeeing on using LWZ tiffs. JPEG2000 has a number o f vendors that support it. Perhaps it is not popular with photographers, but it is used in GIS. I use the compress or from ECW. You can view JPEG2000 in Irfanview. If the owners ligthened up on royalties so that browsers could use JPEG2000, it would become the standard. I'm not sur e there will ever be the day where a format can't be conv erted. Bits are bits. Hardware issues, sure, but if you h ave the data, you will be able to convert it. --Or iginal Message-- From: LAURIE SOLOMON Sender: filmsca nners_ow...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com Reply To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk Subject: [filmscanners] R E: Advice on scanner settings Sent: Feb 26, 2009 9:35 AM From my understanding JPEG 2000 is a dead fish in terms of support and adoptions. If my understanding is correct , you would wind up with orphaned files that neither you nor anyone else would be able to open and read in the fut ure; not good for archives. :-) The standard JPEG and th e TIFF are at least universal and established formats tha t are supported by almost all programs and are likely to be so in the future. You are should do the LWZ tiff. I am not sure what you are trying to say here. -Orig inal Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of li...@lazygranch.com Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10 :52 AM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings You can JPEG2000, which h as a lossless option. I would have to research it, but I think it only uses 8 per color. You are should do the LWZ tiff. - --- Unsubscribe by m ail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe films canners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropr iate) in the message title or body --- - Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.c o.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe fil mscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title o r body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
Actually, encryption these days is hard to break. Just as k the NSA. (It is more cost effective to bribe to get the data.) Even password protection is hard to break. Some d isgruntled San Francisco employee refused to give up a pa ssword. Experts spent weeks trying to get around the pass word. The employee went to jail and still wouldn't give i t up. Eventually the employee, while still in his cell, h ad a one on one with the mayor and gave up the password. There is some question regarding the longevity of driv es that are not running. Much like a car that sits idle f or years, will it work. There is a technology known as MA ID, which IIRC stands for massive array of idle drives. Library science is a lot more than cataloging these day s. -Original Message- From: LAURIE SOLOMON lau...@advancenet.net Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:48:13 To: li...@lazygranch.com Subject: [filmscanners] RE : Advice on scanner settings Encryption can be done lo cally; but what can be encrypted can be unencrypted if s omeone really wants to. Given the rash of allegedly secu re information that has managed to get publically distri buted these days with respect to major supposedly high s ecurity operations such as banks, corporations, governme ntal agencies that have lost confidential secure data, I would not dismiss security as being not much of an issue . Of course there is always the problem of the hard dr ives and storage facilities at these online off-location data storage operations going bad, going down when you need to retrieve the data, or just getting corrupted des pite any and all precautions. -Original Message--- -- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:film scanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of li...@lazygra nch.com Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:57 AM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings Security isn't much of an issue t hese days since you coul d encrypt locally. Goin out of business is very likely. M ediastor was in the same busi ness and went under. -Original Message- Fro m: LAURIE SOLOMON lau...@ad VANCENET.NET Date: Th u, 26 Feb 2009 10:23:29 To: l i...@lazygranch.com Su bject: [filmscanners] RE: Advice on scanner settings I'd like to point out that I neve r had a Seagate produ ct fail. Of course, that could be luck. They come with 5 year warranties. I have had a c ouple of them go b ad; but I have had a number of brands g o bad. Hard dr ives after all are mechanical devices; an d their intern al parts do wear out, do get damaged, and do get overhe ated. Some brands go bad sooner than others even if th ey have extended long warrantees. When they d o it is a pain to send them back for warrantee service a nd to l ose the data on them. The offsite service is handy in the event of fire or theft. Yes, except if th ey g o out of business or have security issues, which are d istinct possibilities in this day and age. Like so man y others, I have found that many services offer good rat es and terms, good service and security, and the like wh en they are new and trying to establish themselves a nd a client base. However after the introductory offer or pe riod, things change with pricing going up, terms changin g, service and security declining, etc. By th en, you ca n terminate your service or move to a differ ent online s torage operation if things change to your d isliking; but they count on the inconvenience factor a nd inertia to ke ep you even if things change for the w orst. Most people overstay their welcome due to the i nconvenience of movi ng their data from those storage fa cilities to new ones or purchasing additional drives to store the data on at h ome or at an external location l ike a bank vault. - Original Message- From : filmscanners_ow...@halft one.co.uk [mailto:filmscanne rs_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of gary Sent: Thursd ay, February 26, 2009 2:05 AM To: lau...@advancenet.ne t Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner setting s I'd like to point out that I never had a Seagate pr oduct fail. Of course, that coul d be luck. They come w ith 5 year warranties. Of course , I probably just cu rsed one of my drives by mentioning I had no failures. I've built PCs for people that would s pend the extra m oney for a Seagate and had the drives ar rive DOA. More than once mind you. One was from IBM, and the other F ujitsu, a company I thought had it's act tog ether. If you get external drives, consider spending a bit mor e and get esata. I have this general distrust of USB. http://www.carbonite.com/ These people advertis e he avily on http://techguylabs.com/radio/pmwiki.php I have no idea if the service is any good, but it is onli ne o ffsite storage, and relatively cheap. Offer code I b el ieve is Leo, but you could just listen to any of his p odcasts and get the code. The offsite service is handy in the event of fire or theft. Tony Sleep wro te : On 26/02
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
Seagate is tops in the industry at 5 years. Was? They have just slashed their warranty to 3 yrs on some drives - http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3188 I have my reasons not to like Seagate, but none are due to drive quality. They've just had a load of trouble with their latest barracuda drives - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/16/barracuda_failure_plague/ Bob Frost -- From: li...@lazygranch.com Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
On 26/02/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: There is DVD+R and DVD-R. For technical reasons, +R is pr eferred. DVD-RAM is to be avoided. This was DVD+R Nowadays, most publishers have ftp. Yup. Except this was a monstrous 1.5m x 1.5m @300dpi file, which took up most of the DVD and would have taken far longer to FTP than driving, and 'time was of the essence'. For some reason that was never explained the agency insisted on my upsizing it rather than giving it to their printer to do. Fortunately nobody has ever asked me to do similar before or since. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
Fortunately got the 1.5Tbytes. Also, they still have 5 years. The only computer part I have they really seems to be junk are these Gigabyte Rocket fans. What a pain to replace. One stopped turning, but the system shut down. The other lost it's speed control. I use Zalman now. Bob Frost wrote: Seagate is tops in the industry at 5 years. Was? They have just slashed their warranty to 3 yrs on some drives - http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3188 I have my reasons not to like Seagate, but none are due to drive quality. They've just had a load of trouble with their latest barracuda drives - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/01/16/barracuda_failure_plague/ Bob Frost -- From: li...@lazygranch.com Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings--Thanks!
The Vuescan IR is pretty good. However, I view film scanning like playing a LP. At the very least, you need to blow off the dust. Carlisle Landel wrote: Bunch, Wow! The list lives! Thanks to all for the advice. Especiallly, thanks for the reminder that IR filtering doesn't work for Kodachrome. I've got the bulk slide feeder, so the plan is to simply drop a box of slides in and start it up, then go away and drop another in when I get to it. I figure if I do a couple of boxes an evening, it'll eventually get done. I'm going with the memory is cheap theory and will use the 4000dpi TIFF settings. Best regards, Carlisle Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
Good to see some discussion on this list again! Preston Earle wrote: I think the scan resolution should be determined by how you plan to use the final images. A 4000ppi scan will give a file capable of being printed to up to 17 x 25. If all you want to do with most files is display them on a screen or make 4x6 prints, 4000ppi is overkill, and you will spend a lot of time cleaning up raw scans and a lot of effort resizing large files for their intended purpose. There are two basic approaches to this, and I take the other one from Preston. I think Carlisle is on the right track. I say scan once, at the highest resolution the scanner can do (in this case 4000 spi), and create the best archive image for whatever use happens later. I would also consider using the greater bit depth Carlisle's Nikon scanner can capture, even though this will double the storage space needed for each file. You don't have to spend time 'cleaning up' the scans until you need to use them. And resizing doesn't take a lot of effort when it needs to be done -- I use a Photoshop plugin (Fred Miranda's Web Presenter Pro) to do such downsizing, and find it fast with excellent results. As to file format, I'd use jpeg. A 4000ppi 35mm scan will be about 20 megs in size. A good quality JPEG will be 2-2.5 megs and a 2700ppi JPEG will be about 1 meg. With 2700ppi JPEGS, I can keep my 12,500 image archive in 10 Gigs of hard disk. If they were 4000ppi tiffs it would be 250 Gigs, and I don't believe the files would be any more useful. As storage becomes cheaper these arguments become less convincing. Again, I think Carlisle is on the right track. I would not use JPG for this purpose. If you haven't downloaded the Polaroid Dust and Scratches filter from http://www.polaroid.com/service/software/poladsr/poladsr.html you should try it. It isn't intuitive and takes some experimentation, but it is pretty good at cleaning up minor imperfections in scans. I agree with Preston here. The Polaroid filter is useful for Kodachrome slides, for which the Vuescan infra-red cleaning (or Nikon ICE) won't work. But I would save the 'uncleaned' files in the archive collection, and apply the cleaning filter only at the stage of processing an image for a particular use. Peter Marquis-Kyle Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
Note that with vuescan, you can save raw images, then pro cess them later. I generally don't work that way, but it is another option. In the scanning process, almost every thing is done post processing. The exception would be mul tipass scanning (usually multiple sampling, not really mu ltiple passes) and a long exposure pass. You would have to save the IR as well if you want to do cleaning from a raw image. I just bought three 1.5 terrabyte drives, which in Raid 5 should give me 3 terrabytes. When I built the PC, 300/byte was a big drive. My point, don't worry about the size of the files. If memory serves me right, I paid $150 for the 300 gbyte drives a few years ago. The 1.5T Seagates were $109 at Frys. Seagate already announc ed the 2.5g drives. However, 3Tbytes should last the usse ful live of the PC. --Original Message-- From: Carlisle Landel Sender: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com ReplyTo: filmscann...@halftone. co.uk Subject: [filmscanners] Advice on scanner settings Sent: Feb 25, 2009 8:32 AM Bunch, I about to begin scan ning a lifetime of slides (mostly Ektachrome but a smatte ring of Kodachrome) using a Nikon LS-5000 and Vuescan. A re the following settings appropriate? Why or why not? I'm planning on 4000 dpi for maximum resolution, with 3 s amples and the color analog gain set at 1 for all colors. I'm also planning a light infrared screen with no other filtering with respect to colors, grain reduction, or sh arpness. I'm planning to auto balance colors using the d efault options and appropriate slide types. With respect to output, I gather that TIFF is better than JPEG, becau se JPEG is compressed. Is that right? Thanks for your i nput, Carlisle --who figures he'll start scanning now, then figure out how to manipulate scanned images later. -- -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanner s' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
On 25/02/2009 Peter Marquis-Kyle wrote: I say scan once, at the highest resolution the scanner can do (in this case 4000 spi), and create the best archive image for whatever use happens later. Agreed. 4000ppi will also reduce any issues with grain aliasing, which can be more of a problem at 2700ppi especially with Nikon scanners because the LED lightsource is semi-collimated. Disk space is cheap compared to the sheer arduous displeasure of scanning! I would also consider using the greater bit depth Carlisle's Nikon scanner can capture, even though this will double the storage space needed for each file. Agreed again. Save as 16bit TIFF because the greater precision is more tolerant of processing, at least until you have completed all post-production. If you aren't likely to want to make further changes at that point the final files can be downsampled to 8 bit. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
On 26/02/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: I just bought three 1.5 terrabyte drives RAID can add resilience but no way can it be considered safe, so don't forget the other 4! Here I have: 3 x 1TB RAID3 = 2TB 2 x 1TB for backup (on another LAN PC) 2 x 1TB for offsite backup. So that's 7 x 1TB for 2TB of storage. I don't trust HDD's much. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Advice on scanner settings
I think raid 0 is probabaly as safe as it gets. Once you spread the data, then I agree things could get exciting. There is a chance of the OS peeing on your data. I hav e a Seagte external for backup, but I have nothing that c an handle 3T. However it took me a while to fill up the 6 00 Gbytes on my system. (Four 300G drives in RAID 10.) I finally went digital with a 5D Mark II, so I figure I will be filling the drives at a faster rate. Live View is certainly better than a magnifier on the viewfinder. - -Original Message-- From: Tony Sleep Sender: fi lmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com ReplyTo: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk Subject: [filmsca nners] Re: Advice on scanner settings Sent: Feb 25, 2009 6:24 PM On 26/02/2009 li...@lazygranch.com wrote: I just bought three 1.5 terrabyte drives RAID can add resilience but no way can it be considered safe, so don't forget the other 4! Here I have: 3 x 1TB RAID3 = 2T B 2 x 1TB for backup (on another LAN PC) 2 x 1TB for of fsite backup. So that's 7 x 1TB for 2TB of storage. I don't trust HDD's much. -- Regards Tony Sleep htt p://tonysleep.co.uk -- -- U nsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'un subscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_dig est' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: film scanning: new option
Norman Carver wrote: Peter, Re your query on copying: I used the holder that came with the Nikon 8000 --not perfect but workable I set it vertically in a small aluminum channel, with emulsion (dull) side towards camera. Behind this is curved white paper lit by two electronic flash at roughly 45 deg (incandescent works too). Then I mounted all of this on a board with a quick-release for Canon 5D II. The film holder slides to allow for 35 to 6x6. Its not beautiful but it works. I am in Calif now so I cannot make a picture of the setup for you Thanks, Norm! Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: North Coast Photo E-6 w/ scanning?
Obviously there is a break-even point where the film plus development plus scanning will exceed the cost of the di gital camera. To reach the quality of the better Canon bo dies, say 5d mark II or 1 mark III, you need to shoot Ast ia. The film is pretty cheap in propacks. Digital would have a few advantages. Higher ISO versus 100 for Astia. If you don't shoot any action, the higher ISO would be of no benefit. Digital has more flexibility in the number o f frames shot. Now that Canon has a 21 Mpixel body for $2700, I think digital is the way to go. When you had to pay $8k for the body, film made more sense. --Orig inal Message-- From: sn...@cox.net Sender: filmscanne rs_ow...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com ReplyTo: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk Subject: [filmscanners] Nort h Coast Photo E-6 w/ scanning? Sent: Jan 30, 2009 8:04 PM I wonder if anyone has had positive experience with Nor th Coast Photo. I just got a test roll back. Ken Rockwel l (love him or hate him) mentioned them on his website. I f you request scanning at the time of slide processing, t hey will do enhanced scanning for an additional $11.95 plus the cost of developing your E-6 film. The slides ar e scanned to 3339x5035, which to my calculations means th ey are scanning at just about 4000 dpi. You get a box of mounted transparencies and a CD in return mail. The scan s were extraordinarily clean--not much time to collect du st if they are scanned at processing. I am not 100% sure how much better they are than what I get from my SS4000. He advocates this as a cheap alternative to buying new d igital cameras every few years. Just buy a film camera wi th a 20 year life span and scan all your slides. The tot al cost for the single roll was US$ 8.25 for processing + 11.95 + 4.95 return postage + 0.79 postage to get it the re and $8 for the film, for a total of $34 for the roll-- or roughly a dollar per shot. Has anyone else used their scanning? As my SS4000 gets crankier, I am not intereste d in replacing it. Stan --- - Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with ' unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_di gest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: film scanning: new option
Norm Carver wrote: Since I have hundreds of 6x6 negs and color to digitize and am frustated by the slowness of film scanners in general I have recently begun copying negs with my new Canon 5D-II (22 meg). After some comparitive tests with 4000dpi scans on the Nikon 8000 I can say the follwing: 1. BW 300dpi prints on Epson 3800 enlarged to equal 50 x 50 are indistinguishable 2. The copies tend to be sharper corner to corner than scans (used Canon 50mm macro @ f11) 3. The time is cut to at least 1/3 (there is a slght more batch processing time going from RAW to Mon 4. There is no doubt the scans have more data and I would go that way for difficult images or huge prints. So am I delusional according died-in-the-wool scanners? Hi Norm, those findings are interesting. Can you tell us a bit more? -- in particular, how did you hold the negative flat and square for the camera, and what sort of lighting did you use. (I have some old 35mm black and white negs shot on Ilford HP5 pushed a stop or so. These produce a lot of grain aliassing on my Nikon 2700spi scanner, so I'm keen to try other ways to digitise them. I have done some quick and dirty experiments with Canon 5d (Mark I), Canon FD Auto Bellows, 50mm FD macro lens, and slide copier attachment. The results looked hopeful, but I have not had time to refine the method.) Peter Marquis-Kyle Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: SprintScan 4000 on Mac with USB-SCSI adapter
That is a tough one. I find USB a cluster f*** of driver hassles. I find firewire to be less of a software hassle. I would trust a firewire to SCSI converter more that USB based device. If they were still selling the Dimage 5 400 II, I would say get a new scanner. Mine cost a bit ov er $500, and it totally blows away my Artixscan, which is similar to your Sprintscan. However, Minolta sold the bu siness to Sony, which killed the film scanner. I guess with Minolta gone, a new scanner would be a Nikon. Price y. --Original Message-- From: sn...@cox.net Sender: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@la zygranch.com ReplyTo: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk Subje ct: [filmscanners] SprintScan 4000 on Mac with USB-SCSI adapter Sent: Jan 18, 2009 10:59 AM I asked this ques tion a while back, I think. Now that I have a late mod el Mac Pro and an old SprintScan 4000, I am tiring of dra gging out my old Dell computer with its SCSI card to do m y slide scanning. Have any of you used the USB -- SCS I adapters, such as the one made by Ratoc? http://fire wireshop.stores.yahoo.net/newustoulscs1.html Is this a good expenditure of $100 or am I better off looking for a non-SCSI USB film scanner? Stan - - -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halfton e.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message tit le or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: film scanning: new option
I'm just impressed you could get the Mark II. It is alway s backordered when I check the usual suspects (BH, etc.) That is the body that will get me to give up film. That, and I can't get quick turn E-6 anymore. --Original Message-- From: Norm Carver Sender: filmscanners_o w...@halftone.co.uk To: li...@lazygranch.com ReplyTo: f ilmscann...@halftone.co.uk Subject: [filmscanners] film scanning: new option Sent: Jan 18, 2009 2:01 PM Since I have hundreds of 6x6 negs and color to digitize and am frustated by the slowness of film scanners in general I have recently begun copying negs with my new Canon 5D-I I (22 meg). After some comparitive tests with 4000dpi scans on the Nikon 8000 I can say the follwing: 1. B W 300dpi prints on Epson 3800 enlarged to equal 50 x 50 are indistinguishable 2. The copies tend to be sharper corner to corner than scans (used Canon 50mm macro @ f11) 3. The time is cut to at least 1/3 (there is a slgh t more batch processing time going from RAW to Mon 4. T here is no doubt the scans have more data and I would go that way for difficult images or huge prints. So am I delusional according died-in-the-wool scanners? Norm Carver nfcar...@iserv.net - - -- Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmsca nners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or bo dy Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: film scanning: new option
It is hard to say if you are delusional or not since you have failed to give us enough data to say if the two are comparable or if they are apples and oranges. You say you were comparing 400o dpi scans on a Nikon 8000 film scanner of 6x6 negatives (were the ones used for the comparison color or black and white negatives?) with copy negatives (the exact same 6x6 negatives as used with the scanner?) shot with a Canon 5D-II (22 megapixel) using a Canon 50mm macro lens at f11. You then go on to tell us that you printed the scan and copy negatives as 50x50 300 dpi BW prints with an Epson 3800 inkjet printer. (The 300 dpi resolution is really low for a final printed output resolution; do you mean that to be 300 ppi for the file's final input resolution - e.g., the resolution of the file in pixels per inch that was sent to the printer to be printed?) The above is ambiguous and vague enough to hinder any sort of a proper evaluation of your findings based on what you have written. You also have not said how they - in each sample - were converted to BW from color if we are talking of color negatives and/or how - in each sample - they were reversed from negative images to positive images in the case of either BW or Color (but especially color). This can impact on sharpness and the correctness of color rendering or black and white tonality especially if they were not converted and/or reversed using the same process and method. If you are talking about translating the raw scanner and camera generated files into 300 ppi standard format image files, in the case of both the scanner and the camera, what interpolation methods were used to in each case to generate the standard format files into 300 ppi image files and where was it accomplished (i.e., the scanner and camera software or in an image editing program) prior to sending the files to the printer whose driver printed them at the 720, 1440, or 2880 dpi printing resolution that characterized the printed image? If you are saying that he final printed image had a printed final output resolution of 300 dpi, what was the resolution of the image files in ppi that were exported to the printer for printing and how was that file resolution arrived at? These things are important when attempting an evaluation and that the same methods of interpolation and amounts of interpolation be used in all cases is important for comparisons. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Norm Carver Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 4:02 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] film scanning: new option Since I have hundreds of 6x6 negs and color to digitize and am frustated by the slowness of film scanners in general I have recently begun copying negs with my new Canon 5D-II (22 meg). After some comparitive tests with 4000dpi scans on the Nikon 8000 I can say the follwing: 1. BW 300dpi prints on Epson 3800 enlarged to equal 50 x 50 are indistinguishable 2. The copies tend to be sharper corner to corner than scans (used Canon 50mm macro @ f11) 3. The time is cut to at least 1/3 (there is a slght more batch processing time going from RAW to Mon 4. There is no doubt the scans have more data and I would go that way for difficult images or huge prints. So am I delusional according died-in-the-wool scanners? Norm Carver nfcar...@iserv.net Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: film scanning: new option
It was not I who posed the question, So am I delusional according died-in-the-wool scanners? in my post or who made a point of noting that they grounded their question in the comparative findings based on an empirical test situation. I was merely suggesting the sorts of clarifications and information that I would need to attempt an answer to your posed question. Since it was not my question and I have no real interest in either resolving the issues I raised or in going to the trouble to determine empirically for myself if your findings are delusional or not, I have no need to test it for myself. In point of fact, I did not read your post as merely throwing out an idea as much as asking for an answer to a question which will either verify what you appear to have concluded or disproves what you think you observed. -Original Message- From: filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk [mailto:filmscanners_ow...@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Norm Carver Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 9:39 PM To: lau...@advancenet.net Subject: [filmscanners] film scanning: new option My dear Solomon, I appreciate your response, but, me thinks you do get a bit carried away I was merely throwing out an idea, not writng a scientific treatise. Of course, if one is doing a comparison, one uses the same negative for both--otherwise what is the point! And keeps all other variables to a minimum. As for all other issues, I suggest if you are interested you test it for yourself Norm Carver Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to listser...@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Quick scanning tips?
Ken McKaba wrote: I use the Epson scanner utility for my 4900 flatbed and the Minolta one for my Dimage ScanDual IV film scanner. They both have histogram, curves, hue saturation adjustments which are all the controls I ever use. I played with Vuescan and SilverFast software but didn't find other useful controls or a better UI. What am I missing? You're missing the VueScan User Guide: http://www.hamrick.com/vuescan/vuescan.pdf I owned VueScan Prof. for a couple of years but never made much use of it. Just a few days ago I discovered the user guide and it made a world of difference in what I got out of the program. VS goes well beyond a scanner's bundled modules. How to actually get the most out of it, however, is barely mentioned in its Help file. Thus you need the user guide. There's also a link to two good tutorials on the VueScan home page. I printed them both as PDFs so I could refer back to them easily. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein... aka enochsvision, Enoch's Vision Inc. Photography, Poetry http://www.enochsvision.com Baha'i History: http://www.viewsofakka.com Blog: http://enochsvision.wordpress.com Videos: http://www.youtube.com/enochsvision9 Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. - Joseph Campbell Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Help With Vuescan
The good news is I run a 5400-II with Vuescan. The bad news is I haven't a clue why yours isn't working. Did you run that calibration step that the software requests? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yesterday I tried to use Vuescan but it was frustrating. Here's the situation: my old Nikon LS4000 is in urgent need of cleaning. I had a Minolta 5400-II on the shelf in an unopened box. Right after I bought it Minolta abandoned the business so I just forgot about the unit. Now I need to use it. Minolta's software is worse than awful. Any adjustment in the scanner interface at all blows out all the highlights. I have hundreds of valuable and faded historical images to restore. So, Vuescan to the rescue. No matter how I set the input and output options I get nothing. The preview scan is dark gray and the output is just a file with all black pixels. I don't remember that ever happening before but I haven't used Vuescan for a couple of years. What glaringly obvious mistake am I making? I am clueless. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein... aka enochsvision, Enoch's Vision Inc. Photography, Poetry http://www.enochsvision.com Baha'i History: http://www.viewsofakka.com Blog: http://enochsvision.wordpress.com Videos: http://www.youtube.com/enochsvision9 Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. - Joseph Campbell Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Help With Vuescan
gary wrote: The good news is I run a 5400-II with Vuescan. The bad news is I haven't a clue why yours isn't working. Did you run that calibration step that the software requests? :::embarrassed::: Yes, after I read your email! Vuescan works just fine now and the results are beautiful. Thank you. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yesterday I tried to use Vuescan but it was frustrating. Here's the situation: my old Nikon LS4000 is in urgent need of cleaning. I had a Minolta 5400-II on the shelf in an unopened box. Right after I bought it Minolta abandoned the business so I just forgot about the unit. Now I need to use it. Minolta's software is worse than awful. Any adjustment in the scanner interface at all blows out all the highlights. I have hundreds of valuable and faded historical images to restore. So, Vuescan to the rescue. No matter how I set the input and output options I get nothing. The preview scan is dark gray and the output is just a file with all black pixels. I don't remember that ever happening before but I haven't used Vuescan for a couple of years. What glaringly obvious mistake am I making? I am clueless. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein... aka enochsvision, Enoch's Vision Inc. Photography, Poetry http://www.enochsvision.com Baha'i History: http://www.viewsofakka.com Blog: http://enochsvision.wordpress.com Videos: http://www.youtube.com/enochsvision9 Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. - Joseph Campbell Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Help With Vuescan
Before I forget, vuescan by default does a small amount o f clipping at the white level. This is a parameter to set . There is also a place to toggle the scanner to turn cli pped areas to say red so you can judge the effects of cli pping. Sometimes a few specs of blownout pixels is better than a too dark image. Or you can set it up not to blow out any pixels, then tweak in photoshop. I would say s pend a few hours with Vuescan before doing serious work. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] svision.com Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 10:45:51 To:list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Help With V uescan gary wrote: The good news is I run a 5400-II with Vuescan. The bad news is I haven't a clue why yo urs isn't working. Did you run that calibration ste p that the software requests? :::embarrassed::: Yes, a fter I read your email! Vuescan works just fine now and t he results are beautiful. Thank you. [EMAIL PROTECTED] nochsvision.com wrote: Yesterday I tried to use Vuesc an but it was frustrating. Here's the situation: my old Nikon LS4000 is in urgent need of cleaning. I had a Mi nolta 5400-II on the shelf in an unopened box. Right after I bought it Minolta abandoned the business so I jus t forgot about the unit. Now I need to use it. Minolt a's software is worse than awful. Any adjustment in t he scanner interface at all blows out all the highlights. I have hundreds of valuable and faded historical ima ges to restore. So, Vuescan to the rescue. No mat ter how I set the input and output options I get noth ing. The preview scan is dark gray and the output is just a file with all black pixels. I don't remember that ever happening before but I haven't used Vuescan for a couple of years. What glaringly obvious mistake am I ma king? I am clueless. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein... aka enochsvision, Enoch's Vision Inc. Photography, Poetry ht tp://www.enochsvision.com Baha'i History: http://www.vie wsofakka.com Blog: http://enochsvision.wordpress.com Vi deos: http://www.youtube.com/enochsvision9 Behind all th ese manifestations is the one radiance, which shines thro ugh all things. The function of art is to reveal this ra diance through the created object. - Joseph Campbell Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners ' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: ss4000 not initializing
Thanks, Stan, That gives me an idea what to expect and to not rush at all. Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 10:23 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: ss4000 not initializing [you may get two replies due to operator error...] Look here: http://pages.videotron.com/tiller/SS4000faults.htm and here: http://www.mail-archive.com/filmscanners@halftone.co.uk/msg20572.html Whether you will find anything to fix is uncertain and there is plenty to break. Stan Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] RE: ss4000 not initializing
Thanks, Tony. The lamp comes on immediately with the power button. There's a split-second of what might be a motor but seems more likely to be a relay driven by the power switch. I tried the Polaroid cleaning brush but to no effect. SCSI connectors seem OK and re-seating them also had no effect. It's the same for changing termination status SCSI ID. For people who've opened up their SS4000s, what did you use to unclip the 4 fasteners on the bottom? Gently working them with a screwdriver looks like one way to go. BOb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 8:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: ss4000 not initializing On 22/04/2008 Bob Geoghegan wrote: I turned on my SprintScan 4000 for the first time in about a year today. The 2 LEDs light up instantly with no flashing from the yellow one and there are no motor noises. Check your SCSI and power cable connectors. I'm not sure the 4000 initialises if the SCSI is detached. Otherwise, is the lamp on, visible through the front slot? It should light immediately when you press the power button, and if the bulb is blown I doubt it's going to go through initialisation. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: ss4000 not initializing
On 23/04/2008 Bob Geoghegan wrote: For people who've opened up their SS4000s, what did you use to unclip the 4 fasteners on the bottom? Gently working them with a screwdriver looks like one way to go. I haven't done it, no need yet touch wood. But I just flipped mine over and had a look and yes, they look like typical wedge-type clips and a flat bladed screwdriver pushed gently inwards should do it. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: ss4000 not initializing
[you may get two replies due to operator error...] Look here: http://pages.videotron.com/tiller/SS4000faults.htm and here: http://www.mail-archive.com/filmscanners@halftone.co.uk/msg20572.html Whether you will find anything to fix is uncertain and there is plenty to break. Stan Bob Geoghegan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, Tony. The lamp comes on immediately with the power button. There's a split-second of what might be a motor but seems more likely to be a relay driven by the power switch. I tried the Polaroid cleaning brush but to no effect. SCSI connectors seem OK and re-seating them also had no effect. It's the same for changing termination status SCSI ID. For people who've opened up their SS4000s, what did you use to unclip the 4 fasteners on the bottom? Gently working them with a screwdriver looks like one way to go. BOb -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tony Sleep Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 8:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: ss4000 not initializing On 22/04/2008 Bob Geoghegan wrote: I turned on my SprintScan 4000 for the first time in about a year today. The 2 LEDs light up instantly with no flashing from the yellow one and there are no motor noises. Check your SCSI and power cable connectors. I'm not sure the 4000 initialises if the SCSI is detached. Otherwise, is the lamp on, visible through the front slot? It should light immediately when you press the power button, and if the bulb is blown I doubt it's going to go through initialisation. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: ss4000 not initializing
On 22/04/2008 Bob Geoghegan wrote: I turned on my SprintScan 4000 for the first time in about a year today. The 2 LEDs light up instantly with no flashing from the yellow one and there are no motor noises. Check your SCSI and power cable connectors. I'm not sure the 4000 initialises if the SCSI is detached. Otherwise, is the lamp on, visible through the front slot? It should light immediately when you press the power button, and if the bulb is blown I doubt it's going to go through initialisation. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Talking to myself...
On 04/04/2008 David J. Littleboy wrote: I moved the Firewire card (an Adaptex AUA-3121 HBA) from my previous previous machine and the 8000 now works. Shame. I was going to offer you $20 for it. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Talking to myself...
It's amazing how little compatibility can exist between supposedly the same protocols and interfaces. What a hassle. Art David J. Littleboy wrote: By the way, I fixed the Nikon 8000 problem. It turns out the Firewire card in my new machine doesn't get along with the 8000. I moved the Firewire card (an Adaptex AUA-3121 HBA) from my previous previous machine and the 8000 now works. Whew! Now I need to disassemble it and clean the mirror. David J. Littleboy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tokyo, Japan Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Anonymous, Spam filters are inconvenient Why? I get a couple of hundred spams a day and I simply use the built-in spam filter in Vista's Windows Mail; it is the best I have come across. It only misses about 1 in a 100, and takes out far fewer genuine emails, so a quick glance through the list of email subjects (an education in itself!) in the spam folder before deleting them probably takes no more time than all your complicated attempts to avoid them. Just my thoughts. Bob Frost. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
On 03/04/2008 David J. Littleboy wrote: Agreed. Take it off list. I'm done with it. It stayed on because of the question of whether or not list members want their email addresses exposed to other list members, risking spam. If anyone has a view either way I would prefer it gets expressed on list so there's some sort of vote. I'll do whichever, it's trivially easy to change the list operation. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
On 3/04/2008 Tony Sleep wrote: I'll do whichever, it's trivially easy to change the list operation. Tony, I think you should leave it as it is. It's not broken, as far as I can see. I think the silent majority appreciate your efforts to keep the conduit open for the (thinning) discussions, some of which concern film scanning. Peter Marquis-Kyle subscriber since, oh, ever so long ago Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Please, keep it the way it's been, Tony. As I stated earlier, I value that dialog with the friends I've made on this list and future acquaintances that I'm sure will join. Jim Tony Sleep wrote: On 03/04/2008 David J. Littleboy wrote: Agreed. Take it off list. I'm done with it. It stayed on because of the question of whether or not list members want their email addresses exposed to other list members, risking spam. If anyone has a view either way I would prefer it gets expressed on list so there's some sort of vote. I'll do whichever, it's trivially easy to change the list operation. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Thank you Tony for explaining why list member email addresses are available -- it does make some sense for those who are willing to put up with spam and its natural corollary, spam filters. I will take some exception to your comment If you don't want to take any action against spammers but rely on others doing stuff for you, you'd be best advised to stop using email because spam is inevitable. Your implication is that I am relying on others (including you) to do stuff for me to avoid spam, while in fact you are doing stuff that *exposes* me to spam. I am doing my bit by having multiple addresses and abandoning those that have been outed -- which happens about once every 18 months. Spam is *not* inevitable -- I have been spam-free for over a year until I posted on the filmscanners mail list. And with the exception of the address I use for filmscanners, I am still spam free. Just think, instead of clogging the Internet and my ISP with hundreds of messages that will be thrown away by a spam blocker, I am able to do my little bit to reduce spam by being invisible to spammers -- unless someone blows my cover. Last I read spam accounts for the bulk of all email -- if we each do our bit to reduce spam we can make email useful again and not tie up so much computing power trying to identify and avoid it. Spam is a scourge that impacts every part of the email chain, and from time to time ISP mail servers buckle under the load. Now that I know posting to the filmscanners list will expose my email address, I'll take care to never post. To everyone on the list, and especially Tony, thank you for the years of information and support. Tony said: snip v All I can do here is change the listmail headers so that only the orginator's name appears in the 'from' field, not their email address. This will of course make it impossible to send personal email to a list member unless you already know their address, which is why I haven't done it in the past. You lot can tell me which you'd prefer. ^ Most lists I am on (around 20) present the sender's email address for exactly this reason. Prodig is the only one I can think of that does not, and also bans email addresses from the message body. It's limiting and annoying if you want to take a discussion off list. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Trying to track down a problem
I go one step further to protect accounts, passwords, and sensitive personal info. I set up the computer that connects to the Internet with its hard drive in a drawer so I can easily *remove* the hard drive when I need a secure system. Say I've been reading email (with the hard drive connected) and need to make an online purchase or banking or whatever. I shut down the computer, disconnect the hard drive and reboot from a Ubuntu Linux LiveCD. At this point the computer is known clean and there's no way anything can be saved on the boot disk (it's a CD after all). After finishing my business all I need to do is log out of the bank's web site then press the computer's power button to shut it off -- I don't have to do a proper shutdown because there's no way I can corrupt the CD by not allowing the system to do a clean shutdown. That saves a few seconds. It *is* annoying to have to shut down and reboot, but the knowledge that the system really is clean makes it worth it. Even if you boot from a CD it *is* important to not have a hard drive in the computer because if there's a hard drive, the operating sysem will save stuff on it and use it on later boots -- precisely what I want to avoid. Oh yes, what about the stuff I want to save? Most of the time it's not needed, but for that which is there's always floppy disks or USB flash RAM. You can be sure I check them for lurking viri, trojans, or whatever before using them on another computer, then do a full erase when I have transferred the info. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Trying to track down a problem
I just checked the two registry entries on my system to make sure I didn't have either of the Srizbi trojan statements, and I don't. However, in reading from this link, the simple answer seems to be for people (and I assume, particularly men) to just stop buying on-line herbal masculine enhancement products which don't work anyway, since over 40% of the spam being generated was for these products. I wouldn't mind spam nearly as much if it provided some education, or useful hints. Did you remember to turn down the thermostat before going to sleep tonight? Naw, I guess even that would get annoying after a while... Art John Sykes wrote: Have a look at this site: http://www.marshal.com/trace/traceitem.asp?article=567 Then click through to read more about the Srizbi trojan. Scary. I downloaded Regscanner after reading this, and then check the registry for the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\RcpApi\(snip), as suggested: fortunately OK. John Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Dieder Bylsma wrote: The scams are because we have a subscriber on our list that archives the list to a public forum... http://www.lexa.ru/FS/ note how all the most recent postings are on this list too ;) Thanks for uncovering that archive. It is highly likely that is where our addresses are harvested. No matter how you obfuscate your email address on the Web it can and will be harvested. Some people use scripts to display their addresses in HTML entities while others use more sophisticated techniques such as adding blank spaces, replacing the @ glyph, or combinations of Javascript and CSS. None of them work for long. My personal website doesn't contain my email address in any form. If people want to contact me there, they are directed to a server-side CGI page. The increase in spam around the world is directly proportional to the increase of gullibility and ignorance in the world. Spammers make money because there are so many suckers out there. Education and commonsense are the only effective defenses against it. -- Cary Enoch Reinstein... aka enochsvision, Enoch's Vision Inc. Photography, poetry http://www.enochsvision.com/ Blog http://enochsvision.wordpress.com/ Behind all these manifestations is the one radiance, which shines through all things. The function of art is to reveal this radiance through the created object. ~Joseph Campbell Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
I joined a list a while ago that had a quiz to insure I wasn't a robot. This swiping of mailing lists to create content is pretty common. They also harvest usenet. -Original Message- From: Dieder Bylsma [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2008 02:46:29 To:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [filmscanners] Re: spam magnet The scams are because we have a subscriber on our list that archives the list to a public forum... http://www.lexa.ru/FS/ note how all the most recent postings are on this list too ;) Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
On 02/04/2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your implication is that I am relying on others (including you) to do stuff for me to avoid spam, while in fact you are doing stuff that *exposes* me to spam. I am doing my bit by having multiple addresses and abandoning those that have been outed -- which happens about once every 18 months. You were asking me to curtail the usefulness of this list to limit your exposure to spam, by suppressing sender addresses. There couldn't be any mailing lists unless they were publically exposed addresses. There couldn't be any support ditto. For some of us email is mission-critical and we can't avoid having a public address that stays constant. That means the common preferred solution is spam filtering. Email RFC's require a postmaster catch-all address for any domain. Whoever runs that account is going to receive spam. Domains cannot be invisible. That too means the common preferred solution is spam filtering. Your approach may work for you, but you're still having to take inonvenient evasive action against spammers and accept a reduction in the utility of email because of their predatory selfishness. I hope we can agree that spammers are the underlying problem here. Now that I know posting to the filmscanners list will expose my email address, I'll take care to never post. Yes, that should work, in the same way that never answering the telephone will completely avoid annoying sales calls. For those of us who have to expose email addresses to the world, spam *is* inevitable. The list itself receives on average 3 attempts a day to *distribute* spam to its 1,200 members, because the address is known to spammers. That is *filtered* out by multiple levels of email filtering and subscription control that also prevents viruses being distributed. If I didn't maintain filters you'd get that crap even if your email address was unpublished in list mails. There is nothing wrong with your approach but it can only work for a minority of people who can burn email accounts as they become unusable. -- Regards Tony Sleep http://tonysleep.co.uk Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Tony, let me preface my remarks with one that I think is important: I greatly appreciate all you have done with this list to bring together such a wonderful resource. If I have caused you grief or upset I am truly sorry. On 02/04/2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your implication is that I am relying on others (including you) to do stuff for me to avoid spam, while in fact you are doing stuff that *exposes* me to spam. I am doing my bit by having multiple addresses and abandoning those that have been outed -- which happens about once every 18 months. You were asking me to curtail the usefulness of this list to limit your exposure to spam, by suppressing sender addresses. I think we are having an unecessary argument -- Say the list itself did not expose the actual email addresses, but those people who are comfortable having their addresses exposed can include them in their postings. That way those who are comfortable in encouraging rising levels of spam while broadcasting their addresses to the world can do so, and those who are willing to accept the confines of only posting on the list have that opportunity as well. To the claim that it would be bothersome for each member to include his/her email address, I suspect that they would only do so when they have a question that they would prefer be answered off-list. There couldn't be any mailing lists unless they were publically exposed addresses. There couldn't be any support ditto. For some of us email is mission-critical and we can't avoid having a public address that stays constant. That means the common preferred solution is spam filtering. Funny, I belong to a number of lists, most of them professional (statistics and engineering). Yes, the email address of the lists themselves is exposed, but not of the participants. Email RFC's require a postmaster catch-all address for any domain. Whoever runs that account is going to receive spam. Domains cannot be invisible. That too means the common preferred solution is spam filtering. Of course you are right for that one address per domain, but that vastly reduces the number of addresses available to spammers, which in turn vastly reduces the number of spam messages flying about the Internet. Your approach may work for you, but you're still having to take inonvenient evasive action against spammers and accept a reduction in the utility of email because of their predatory selfishness. I hope we can agree that spammers are the underlying problem here. Of course spammers are the underlying problem! The issue is what evasive action we are to take to best deal with them. Spam filters are inconvenient as is flying under the spammer's radar. Each reduces the utility of email, but in different ways. The reason I choose to fly under the radar is that it serves the *common* good of reducing email traffic. Now that I know posting to the filmscanners list will expose my email address, I'll take care to never post. Yes, that should work, in the same way that never answering the telephone will completely avoid annoying sales calls. CallerID works fine for the phone, but you are correct that that is really a spam filter. As for other phone spam, I am on the national do not call list -- it works pretty well too. Unfortunately there is no workable do not spam list For those of us who have to expose email addresses to the world, spam *is* inevitable. The list itself receives on average 3 attempts a day to *distribute* spam to its 1,200 members, because the address is known to spammers. That is *filtered* out by multiple levels of email filtering and subscription control that also prevents viruses being distributed. If I didn't maintain filters you'd get that crap even if your email address was unpublished in list mails. And we are all very appreciative of your fine work. Thank you!! There is nothing wrong with your approach but it can only work for a minority of people who can burn email accounts as they become unusable. The assumption you are making is that a person has only one email address, so when it attracts spam they have to notify everyone of their new address. The alternative is to have multiple addresses, which vastly reduces the upset and inconvenience when one gets onto spammers' lists. The reason I could trace the problem to this board is that the halftone address is used *only* here. Now that it has been outed the only entity I need to inform of my new address is the filmscanners mail daemon. Most ISPs provide an account with multiple email addresses, so why not make good use of them? Thank you again for your help and general good humor while struggling with the beasts of operating systems, mailers, spammers, and the occasional snipey list participant, none of which are central to your life, work, family, or recreation. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think we are having an unecessary argument Agreed. Take it off list. David J. Littleboy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tokyo, Japan Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Sigh -- nobody responded directly to my original question, which is Why is my email address displayed on the filmscanners board? Most other participants are identified by name, but their email addresses are *not* displayed. Yes, I could use spam filtering, but I far prefer to live in a spam- free world. And I am successful to the extent that discussion boards do *not* display my email address. I'll leave the address intact a couple more days so I can recieve your responses. Thank you. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
I believe Tony explained that everyone's address is visible. I can certainly see them. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigh -- nobody responded directly to my original question, which is Why is my email address displayed on the filmscanners board? Most other participants are identified by name, but their email addresses are *not* displayed. Yes, I could use spam filtering, but I far prefer to live in a spam- free world. And I am successful to the extent that discussion boards do *not* display my email address. I'll leave the address intact a couple more days so I can recieve your responses. Thank you. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
Art, Here is an interesting article - http://thetechdon.com/40-of-all-spam-comes-from-just-one-source/ that you may not have seen. And note at the end that most spam and viruses come from .USA!! About 2.5 times more than Turkey - the next worst offender. I'm very pleased with the new Windows Mail spam filter in Vista. It does a very good job, only missing one or two out of 200 or so a day, and rarely taking out a list email. Best I've come across. Bob Frost - Original Message - From: Arthur Entlich [EMAIL PROTECTED] Things are truly out of control now with spam. I don't know who responds to spam, such that it is even worth generating, but obviously enough people do to make it worthwhile to distribute. It's a real mess... Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: spam magnet
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:01:52PM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigh -- nobody responded directly to my original question, which is Why is my email address displayed on the filmscanners board? When you say 'board' are you implying that you're reading the filmscanners mailing list through a web interface somewhere, rather than via email? This might explain why you're seeing different things with regards to email address display than everyone else is? Sam. -- Fortified with Essential Bitterness and Sarcasm Matt Groening, Binky's Guide to Love. Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Trying to track down a problem
Have a look at this site: http://www.marshal.com/trace/traceitem.asp?article=567 Then click through to read more about the Srizbi trojan. Scary. I downloaded Regscanner after reading this, and then check the registry for the HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\RcpApi\(snip), as suggested: fortunately OK. John * * * * Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
[filmscanners] Re: Trying to track down a problem
Art, I have not received anything like this from the filmscanners list, or from you. I have, however received at least one message, recently, from a local individual that was several years old - similar, I think, to what you described. I called the individual to help troubleshoot the problem and the first thing I found was that his antivirus had not been working for quite some time. He was getting a message from McAfee stating that he needed to verify his account and decided it was just another attempt by CA to sell him something. I hear this a lot (verify your account) from McAfee subscribers, lately. Most of these individuals are in their eighties and did not warm up to the computer age until the mid to late nineties, or later. About the only time they call me is when they encounter a Blue Screen or something else that stops their computer from functioning. I have started recommending that they cancel their McAfee account and download one of the free antivirus application, such as AVG. I don't know what is causing these strange e-mailings, unless it's a worm. I do not believe this is occurrence is unique. Jim Arthur Entlich wrote: I just received a rather unusual email, and am asking anyone who might have been similarly involved to please email me. On March 31st I sent a posting to this list under the thread [filmscanners] Re: spam magnet, which was posted to the group at 2:41 AM. I recently received an email from someone who I was in correspondence with over 4 years ago (one time) who sent me a copy of that posting which he indicated he had just received as a personal email from the email address I sent the posting from. I have emailed him to ask him if he was ever a member of the filmscanner list, and for the message source header information, which I am waiting to see, but in the meantime, if anyone else on this list has received an unsolicited email from me coming from my email account, rather than this list (that would be from artistik(at)shaw(dot)com), please email me, if possible, with the full header., so I can try to determine what is going on. Some very strange things are happening of late, and I need to try to resolve this. Thank you. Art Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
